Is anyone actually selling Mosin rifles for $450 plus?

[Creedmoor]

Im so confused as to why anyone would even want one.....I personally think there junk. And pay for one? You would have to pay me to take one. I'm sorry fellows, save your cash, buy a more collectable rifle

I have a 44 my dad brought home, I believe my kid has control of it now. My kid has a case or better of them, along the way he bought a few 98's.
They have been much better investments and definitely more fun to shoot.

 

[Miller Tyme]

LOL, yep, quality must suck, thats why after 132 yrs it is still in use and still filling body bags.

 

[Creedmoor]

LOL, yep, quality must suck, thats why after 132 yrs it is still in use and still filling body bags.

Quality??? Ive seen smoother cobs of corn, they had no money then or now to build quality.
Funny thing that I have never seen any Mosin rifle still in use that was built before the 1930's. And most of those were put in long term storage after the war by Mother Russia or the other countries that had stockpiles of them lying around in the fields.
Certainly if Putin had any available AKs, they would be issued long before a 85+ year old bolt rifle.
Mother Russia has nothing left to give the conscripts than Mosins.
Here is your rifle Comrade, and your 10 rounds of 50 year old surplus ammo...

Do you believe that if we were invaded, good old Uncle Sam wouldn't end up giving out our surplus rifles and equipment?

 

[Miller Tyme]

Quality??? Ive seen smoother cobs of corn, they had no money then or now to build quality.
Funny thing that I have never seen any Mosin rifle still in use that was built before the 1930's. And most of those were put in long term storage after the war by Mother Russia or the other countries that had stockpiles of them lying around in the fields.
Certainly if Putin had any available AKs, they would be issued long before a 85+ year old bolt rifle.
Mother Russia has nothing left to give the conscripts than Mosins.
Here is your rifle Comrade, and your 10 rounds of 50 year old surplus ammo...

Do you believe that if we were invaded, good old Uncle Sam wouldn't end up giving out our surplus rifles and equipment?

There are a lot dead Germans on the Eastern Front that would beg to disagree with you if they could.

Hmmmm, the top 10 and everyone used a Mosin

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured/10-snipers-wwii.html

 

[Creedmoor]

There are a lot dead Germans on the Eastern Front that would beg to disagree with you if they could.

Hmmmm, the top 10 and everyone used a Mosin

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured/10-snipers-wwii.html

No one has said they didn't work, so with your post, do you realize that Russia and China lost 4-6 times the soldiers that Germany lost during WW2.
Now tell me would you rather have a Mosin Sniper or a M1 Garand Sniper rifle on a combat deployment?

 

[Miller Tyme]

No one has said they didn't work, so with your post, do you realize that Russia and China lost 4-6 times the soldiers that Germany lost during WW2.
Now tell me would you rather have a Mosin Sniper or a M1 Garand Sniper rifle on a combat deployment?

Mosin PU hands down, good to 600yds with LB ammo, and a very simple to use 2.5 power scope that had good low light qualities. The Garand 1st off didn't even hit the field till mid 1945, and then in the M1C version. The M81/M82 scope with the offset mount was far from being an ideal setup. It also suffered to some extent the same thing the SVT40 & G43 suffered from, a tendency to throw fliers.

 

[Creedmoor]

Mosin PU hands down, good to 600yds with LB ammo, and a very simple to use 2.5 power scope that had good low light qualities. The Garand 1st off didn't even hit the field till mid 1945, and then in the M1C version. The M81/M82 scope with the offset mount was far from being an ideal setup. It also suffered to some extent the same thing the SVT40 & G43 suffered from, a tendency to throw fliers.

As I posted earlier, we own more than a few Mosins, to say that a Garand occasionally throws a flyer when comparing to a Mosin rifle The only one you are kidding is yourself and DoggyDaddy..
If I was a Russian Conscript and they handed me a Mosin, I'm gonna go AWOL ASAP.

WW2
Russia had about 22.5 million killed.
Germany had about 5,5 million
USA had a bit over 407,000
Whos equipment worked better?


One thing for sure, our service rifles have been effective long past 600 yards since the trapdoor rifle through the M14 and the M16 platform rifle is no slouch either. We have been the builder of quality LR Service Rifles since 1879.
Russia not so much.

 

[Miller Tyme]

LOL, nice try, the Mosin also can shoot put further than 600 yds, put heavy ball ammo in one and run a PE or PEM set up and 800 yds + . I have shot all types of WW2 sniper rifles and hand down, and American snipers rank low on the list. The PE, PEM, PU, K98k HT, the No4mk1(T) even the Type 99 where far superior. All had far better optics mounted on proven rifles.

As to who's equipment worked better, depends on what equipment you are talking about.
But to use an old phrase, "quantity has a quality all its own" and both the US & the USSR leveraged that to help win the war.

 

[Basher]

Again, has anyone said they don’t work? I know I didn’t.

But there’s a HUUUGE chasm between a conscripted soldier being given the only turd of a rifle that’s available to him, and a finely crafted rifle that I’d be willing to pay $500, 600, even $1000+ for.

Would I drive a shitbox Pinto everywhere if it was my only option? Yeah, I sure would. But if someone put that same Pinto next to a Civic and told me they were the same year, same mileage, and same price, would I pick the Pinto? Hell no lol.

THAT is my point. The Mosin will stack bodies if the bore isn’t shot out. So will an Enfield, M1903, M70 or a far more modern Tikka. For the same price, the Mosin can wait for the next sucker. And quite honestly, if someone put a case of five Mosins and a nice BCM/DD/whatever AR in front of me and said to choose between the Mosin bundle or the one AR, I’d take the one quality AR.

For $250 or under, a good Mosin is a fun plinker. For $700, I’m not touching one.

 

[Mij]

Mine, I’m assuming a referb, hit a 16x16 inch steel plate at 300 yards. With about a 12 inch spread. With original mil. sights. Useing ap Czech. ammo. Target is still on my range. Never shot that ammo again, still got it in the hidey spot. About 3+ paper wrapped packets of 20 rounds. It blew through 3/8th inch steel plate like butter. I’m not the best shot in the world. But obviously this gun will shoot.

 

[Creedmoor]

Mosin PU hands down, good to 600yds with LB ammo, and a very simple to use 2.5 power scope that had good low light qualities. The Garand 1st off didn't even hit the field till mid 1945, and then in the M1C version. The M81/M82 scope with the offset mount was far from being an ideal setup. It also suffered to some extent the same thing the SVT40 & G43 suffered from, a tendency to throw fliers.

We had the Garand in the US Armys hands were fully equipped by the end of 1941, long before we invaded Normandy.
What are you going to do when you run out of LB ammo, when I run out of M72 I will just buy FGM 168's and bang on.
Marines like normal. it took a few to get to the south pacific.

 

[Mij]

We had the Garand in the US Armys hands were fully equipped by the end of 1941, long before we invaded Normandy.
What are you going to do when you run out of LB ammo, when I run out of M72 I will just buy FGM 168's and bang on.
Marines like normal. it took a few to get to the south pacific.
View attachment 319425

When I got to basic, the class before us were using M1-A1. But I was issued a M-16. All the DI’s called them Metel Toys.

If I had my drothers, I’d choose an M-14. Just a thought. I’ve never shot one. But I know the round, and I * sure trust the makers.

 

[Miller Tyme]

We had the Garand in the US Armys hands were fully equipped by the end of 1941, long before we invaded Normandy.
What are you going to do when you run out of LB ammo, when I run out of M72 I will just buy FGM 168's and bang on.
Marines like normal. it took a few to get to the south pacific.
View attachment 319425

Guess the Marines on Guadalcanal and Army troops in North Africa didn't get the memo.

 

[04FXSTS]

I have two 91/30's one M38 and one M44, the last one I bought was one of the 91/30's for $72.25 to the door. The M38 and one of the 91/30's were built during the war and one 91/30 was pre-wartime. The M44 was built in 1948. The pre-war and post-war builds are nice quality, especially the M44. The finish on the two built during wartime look like they were manufactured under a bridge by trolls using a chisel and a rock but they do shoot decent for a Mosin. Jim.

 

[Creedmoor]

Guess the Marines on Guadalcanal and Army troops in North Africa didn't get the memo.

Yea, I said that earlier in post #71
Did that make the 91/30 a better rifle?

 

[Miller Tyme]

Yea, I said that earlier in post #71
Did that make the 91/30 a better rifle?

Never said better rifle, just a better sniper rifle.

But don't let the truth stand in the way.

 

[Creedmoor]

Never said better rifle, just a better sniper rifle.

But don't let the truth stand in the way.

Your in Neverland my friend.

 

[1nderbeard]

Sold mine a few years ago for $300-$400. This was during the 2020 gun rush days.

 

[92FSTech]

The Mosin was an appropriate rifle for an enormous cannon-fodder conscript army with no hope and no rights. It's was cheap to produce, simple to operate, and if it didn't work right it wasn't like you got to complain about it. They could hand them out with minimal training, and if you died and lost the rifle both you and it were cheap and easy to replace.

Being a Soviet soldier was one of the worst things you could be in the '40s. If you didn't freeze or starve to death or get killed in combat there was a good chance you'd get purged after the war, and even if you didn't you got to spend the rest of your life living in an austere communist "utopia". Even the Germans ended up coming out of the war better off than they did. Nobody gave a crap about the well-being or equipment provided to the Soviet soldier.

Mosins were cheap and abundant back when I was in college and just getting into guns. Even then, I knew enough to know that they weren't "nice" rifles. Sure, the Finns did some interesting things with theirs, but your average surplus Mosin was kind of a turd. They aren't particularly accurate (partially due to the rudimentary sights), the mechanicals are crude and uninteresting, and they should have issued them with wooden mallets so you could get the bolt open when it starts sticking after four or five rounds.

I do wish I'd bought one when they were affordable, if just to have one to juxtapose with my other surplus rifles from the same era. My younger brother does have one and brought it out for a range day one time. By the end of the day it was pretty clear you'd have to be crazy to choose one over a Garand, 1903, 1917, Enfield, Mauser, K31, and probably even the Krag. The other guns are more interesting, better put together, and offer features that a trained shooter can leverage well beyond the capabilities of the Mosin. It was good enough for who it was for, but there were far better options given the choice.

 

[Creedmoor]

The Mosin was an appropriate rifle for an enormous cannon-fodder conscript army with no hope and no rights. It's was cheap to produce, simple to operate, and if it didn't work right it wasn't like you got to complain about it. They could hand them out with minimal training, and if you died and lost the rifle both you and it were cheap and easy to replace.

Being a Soviet soldier was one of the worst things you could be in the '40s. If you didn't freeze or starve to death or get killed in combat there was a good chance you'd get purged after the war, and even if you didn't you got to spend the rest of your life living in an austere communist "utopia". Even the Germans ended up coming out of the war better off than they did. Nobody gave a crap about the well-being or equipment provided to the Soviet soldier.

Mosins were cheap and abundant back when I was in college and just getting into guns. Even then, I knew enough to know that they weren't "nice" rifles. Sure, the Finns did some interesting things with theirs, but your average surplus Mosin was kind of a turd. They aren't particularly accurate (partially due to the rudimentary sights), the mechanicals are crude and uninteresting, and they should have issued them with wooden mallets so you could get the bolt open when it starts sticking after four or five rounds.

I do wish I'd bought one when they were affordable, if just to have one to juxtapose with my other surplus rifles from the same era. My younger brother does have one and brought it out for a range day one time. By the end of the day it was pretty clear you'd have to be crazy to choose one over a Garand, 1903, 1917, Enfield, Mauser, K31, and probably even the Krag. The other guns are more interesting, better put together, and offer features that a trained shooter can leverage well beyond the capabilities of the Mosin. It was good enough for who it was for, but there were far better options given the choice.

But, but, 5.5 million dead Russians still say it's a better Sniper rifle!!!!!