Which is better
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Which is better, Mauser 98 or Mosin Nagant?
That depends entirely on what you want out of the gun.
So spill your guts and tell us before this turns into a shit flinging match.
>>28247795
Enfield.
>op pic related
>>28247795
yes
>>28247809
Shit I'm stupid
M39
>>28247803
Innawoods I guess
>>28247795
Wall, ifn yer a goin innawoods, ask yerseff which wun you'druther not drop innamud.
Take t'other.
>>28247809
I concur.
>>28247795
Mauser 98 if you have $600
Mosin if you have $150
Mosin 1891 vs. Mauser 1898? Mauser 1898 no question.
>>28247795
Use both and get back to me on that. Oh wait, you're probably 12.
Mauser. Mosins are only fondly thought of because they're cheap, and unlike Steyr-Mannlichers or Carcanos you can get ammo for them. The are mediocre rifles at best. The actions are stiff and quickly get stiffer with each shot, the magazine sucks to load (especially for those of us with big hands), lol rimmed ammo, et cetera et cetera. The Mauser 98 isn't the best turnbolt gun I've used, but it's damn close. Mostly because the M/96 Mauser is better.
>>28248761
Thanks for the info, though I'm not 12
>>28248761
M 3 9
A
S
T
E
R A C E
>>28247795
Anon, I...
>>28249022
Polishing a turd.
>>28249113
>Incredibly strong stock designed to withstand sub-zero temperatures, also beautiful arctic birch
>Time-tested and reliable action, if not smooth, functions in virtually any environment, shits all over the K31 in terms of combat reliability
>At worst 1.5MOA accuracy out of the factory, oftentimes sub-MOA with decent ammo
>Fine adjustable front sights, easy to see your target
>Shoots ammo that's half the price of standard Mauser ammo, even new-production
>Still cheaper than a Swedish Mauser, but often shoots just as well as one
2/10 made me respond. I'm not saying that the M39 is the end-all of rifles, but it is certainly in its own class and shouldn't be treated like any other nuggets. The Finn 28-30 is another excellent Finnish gun.
The Lee Enfield.
>>28248953
Don't listen to that faggot. He's obviously never shot one of the Finnish Mosins.
A Russian Mosin is cheap and incredibly reliable. Mausers are pretty great shooters, but are often twice the price and tend to gum up in very low temperatures (as do most non-Ruski/Finn guns). The ammo is way more expensive for them too.
I'd go with a Finnish M39 Mosin if I were you. They're beautiful guns, often shoot just as well if not better than Mausers, and are dead-reliable. They also have great open sights and shoot a more powerful round.
I like Mausers but I'm not going to spend more for them when the M39 is the more practical choice in terms of budget and whatnot. Though you should probably research both in more detail to figure out which one you prefer, because you'll always shoot better with the rifle you like better.
>>28250093
I have shot a Finnish Mosin, thank you very much. It's polishing a turd still. If you're expecting to fight a war in sub-zero temperatures with bolt action rifles, sure, fine, go with it. But, A. what the fuck are you doing fighting a war in 2015 with a bolt action rifle, B. what the fuck are you doing fighting a war in 2015 with a bolt action rifle, and C. M/96 Mausers did fine in Finland as well and don't have Mosin problems.
You can find 6.5x55 for around 60 cents a round, which, sure, is about three times as much as 7.62x54R, but it's a goddamn bolt gun, not an MG42. I make about 30 grand a year and can afford to feed my Swede whenever I want, and that is definitely not rolling in the dough.
Get an M/96 for around 400-500 if you want an old bolt gun. If you want to fight, get an AR or an AK. If you want proof that M/96s are better, hand someone who's never loaded with a clip before, hand them a Finnish Mosin and a Swedish Mauser, and see how fast they load that clip into the magazine. Then see how they do at 200 yards.
>>28251726
You ignored most of my points about why the M39 is an objectively good rifle you fucking turd. If you like the Mauser better, sure, go for it. But even if you're obviously not fighting, it sure is nice to shoot a rifle where you know you can always cycle at the range in any weather without any issues if not a whack of the bolt occasionally. And I've never heard anybody but you say that ammo costing 3x as much ISN'T a problem. And if the rifle shoots just as well and had a nice stock, ergonomics, etc, then it's a fine gun and you just don't prefer it.
The Finns used M27's, M28's, M28-30s, M91s, and M39s when they could have bought tons of German Mausers from their Axis allies instead. The Finns made up a nation with some of the greatest gun culture and emphasis on military marksmanship when compared to any military in history. Food for thought.
>>28248619
Let me know when you find a k98 that's a shooter that's under $700...
>>28247795
I don't give a fuck, I want both. And an Enfield. And a Garand.
>>28252522
M39 fag here. You have the greatest attitude here. Godspeed to you.
>>28247850
Both are good.
The better one is the one you're comfortable with.
>>28250093
From playing Red Orchestra, I can confidently say that Mosin is much easier to handle.
>>28251726
>A. what the fuck are you doing fighting a war in 2015 with a bolt action rifle, B. what the fuck are you doing fighting a war in 2015 with a bolt action rifle
So, what level of body-armor will stop 7.62x54r from a 91/30? I want to know in case I end up in some sort of insurgency action against an invading force.
>>28252525
>M39
I want one of those too. My Mosina must have friends her age. WASR just doesn't understand.
>>28252531
I own a 1943 Mosin AND a 1941 k98 sniper...
They're both good rifles to shoot, but there's a reason the term "German Engineering" is a well known phrase, and "Russian Engineering" is not.
Both beautiful guns, but the k98 takes it for me all day long, simply because you can see the anal over-engineering that went into the design, and imo they look nicer / feel nicer.
M39 - don't give a single shit about them but I'm sure they're on par with the Mosin.
>>28252521
what happend to all the russian capture ones for $200
>>28252596
>and "Russian Engineering" is not.
Yet every shithole in the world knows this one.
>>28252616
>posts 3rd world country cheap knockoff version of german engineering
>>28252533
Level IV armor will stop at least one hit. Level III armor will also maybe probably stop it, because 7.62x54r is .308 tier ballistics and that's analogous to 7.62x51mm which is what III is supposed to stop. This shit's on wikipedia.
So essentially, if the armor is soft it goes through.
Only IV and probably III (read: plate) will stop it with minimal effects on the user (ex. wind knocked out of you at worst) and depending on what the plate's made of it can crack after the first hit.
>>28252635
>>28252616
>>28252635
>Unironically thinking the AK is a copy of the STG-44
>>28250034
>Mfw this guy thinks that some Mosin with new furniture is somehow better than a K31
>>28252636
dont forget it's not guaranteed protection, bullets can deflect, or disintegrate into shrapnel and ricochet to parts that arent armored, like your face
>>28252649
that's why they usually have a rubber coating to catch the shrapnel.
>>28252642
Origins[edit]
Throughout World War II, Soviet soldiers found themselves consistently outgunned by heavily armed German troops, especially those armed with the Sturmgewehr StG 44 assault rifles, which the Germans fielded in large numbers.[9][4][10][11][12][13][14][15] The select-fire StG 44 was chambered for a new intermediate cartridge, the 7.92×33mm Kurz, and combined the firepower of a submachine gun with the range and accuracy of a rifle.[10]
On 15 July 1943, a Sturmgewehr was demonstrated before the People's Commissariat of Arms of the USSR.[16] The Soviets were so impressed with the Sturmgewehr, that they immediately set about developing an intermediate caliber automatic rifle of their own, to replace the badly outdated Mosin–Nagant bolt-action rifles and PPSh-41 submachine guns that armed most of the Soviet Army.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Origins
>>28252649
In my defense, if you don't have spall protection you're asking for it.
>>28252596
>On par with a Mosin
Except they were developed and proven to not be just "on par", they far exceeded the standards of any Russian rifles and still surpass most modern sporting bolt rifles.
Considering that you don't think Russian engineering (minimalist and totally functional) exists your opinion goes in the trash anyways. How come Mauserfags have to be even more irrational than nugget fan boys?
>>28252538
Get an M39 from someone then. Or one of the other Finn developed models. I'm sure that beautiful 91/30 there would love a Finnish sister.
>>28252635
>>28252661
>Implying the long-stroke AK is related to the tilting bolt system of the STG44
I have an AK, and I've seen my uncle's richfag friend strip his STG44 in front of me. The guts are nothing alike.
The G3 family is a better relation than the AK is.
>>28252648
Not just new furniture. But you obviously have no clue what you're talking about anyways. K31 proved unreliable in combat conditions and is just a bench queen either way, and the M39 does an equally good job of this while not having a stock that was dumped and shat all over by Swiss conscripts.
K31 is a fine rifle and I plan on purchasing one soon. Doesn't mean I think it's better or worse for sporting purposes, but I bought the M39 first BECAUSE it was the objectively better purchase at the time and still would be .
>>28247809
do Enfield come in cheap ammo?
>>28252669
hey i am just pointing out history here. the germans innovated and created something novel, the russians copied the idea and most of the mechanics.
Concept[edit]
A Type 2 AK-47, the first machined receiver variation
The AK-47 is best described as a hybrid of previous rifle technology innovations. "Kalashnikov decided to design an automatic rifle combining the best features of the American M1 and the German StG44."[23] Kalashnikov's team had access to these weapons and had no need to "reinvent the wheel". Kalashnikov himself observed: "A lot of Russian Army soldiers ask me how one can become a constructor, and how new weaponry is designed. These are very difficult questions. Each designer seems to have his own paths, his own successes and failures. But one thing is clear: before attempting to create something new, it is vital to have a good appreciation of everything that already exists in this field. I myself have had many experiences confirming this to be so."[24]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Concept
>>28252688
Kalashnikov probably used the STG model heavily to understand design concepts for assault rifles, but as mentioned before, the guts of the two rifles are nothing alike.
You can cite sources all you want but they aren't actually making the counter argument you're claiming they are.
>>28252661
You've conveniently left out the part where all of Kalashnikov's early designs were based off of hardware that wasn't the STG-44.
>Buh buh dey stole the idea
Of course they fucking did, it was a good idea. Everyone stole the idea. You specifically said "muh German engineering" and mechanically the AK is an entirely different beast.
>>28252688
desu the SKS was designed in 1943 and bears more resemblance.
>>28252688
>and most of the mechanics.
as in copied the idea of a carbine-sized auto-loading select-fire rifle with a detachable box magazine.
That's where the similarities stop.
>STG/AK argument.
Every. Fucking. Time.
On a side note, I want to add an M39 to my collection, but demand good condition.
Is there anywhere that has good offerings?
>>28247803
>itistoolate,Sergei.cccp
Mauser feels nice, Mosin is cheaper to feed. But both shoot just fin. A speeding bullet is a speeding bullet. aint no nigger no the difference at the other end of the range.
>>28252640
THIS
>>28248761
>The actions are stiff and quickly get stiffer with each shot, the magazine sucks to load (especially for those of us with big hands), lol rimmed ammo, et cetera et cetera.
ive got to say, i have had the exact opposite experience. ive put a lot of rounds through my Mosin. its a 1938 Izhevsk round receiver, and i can put rounds through it, and use stripper clips with no problem (usually). my dad and i went out in the woods and shot probably 100 rounds of surplus through it one day. and i shot it at such a rate that after 3 magazines it was too hot to hold the wood around the barrel
you must have one of the millions of Mosins that were not made to as such a high degree of precision.
is yours a wartime variant?
One is cheaper and does the same job
Best performance is from Lee Enfields
Mauser 98 is more aesthetically pleasing
Mosin literally costs like 100-150 $ in the US and around 150-400 € here in Finland which is about 2-4 times cheaper than Mauser 98 as far as I know.
Mosin
>>28250093
>Mausers are pretty great shooters, but are often twice the price and tend to gum up in very low temperatures
if you are thinking of the stories of that happening on the eastern front, remember, the russians were very low on lubricating oil for their weapons. in order to stretch the supply they cut it with petrol. the germans had no such shortage and their oil was at standard viscosity, which ended up freezing in winter temperatures.
>>28251726
What are these mosin problems that an M39 supposedly has?
>>28252664
wouldn't the heavy duty mil-tier plate carrier contain the spalling?
>>28252798
You can get a norwegian rebarreled 30-06 mauser 98k for about 200-400€.
>>28252596
>M39 - don't give a single shit about them but I'm sure they're on par with the Mosin.
when a finish mosin left the factory, it was guaranteed to shoot AT MOST 1.5 MOA. that was the minimum. they bought barrels from Germany and another country i cant remember, Sweden, or Belgium, or something.
the rifles were very fine
>>28252661
they copied the concept of the rifle, not the design.
its a tilting bolt, the design is more similar to an upside down Garamd receiver.
>>28252687
Ishapore enfield. They shoot cheap(er) 7.62mm
>>28252596
You got pics of your "sniper"?
>>28252616
is that an m16?
>>28252678
>Not just new furniture. But you obviously have no clue what you're talking about anyways. K31 proved unreliable in combat conditions and is just a bench queen either way, and the M39 does an equally good job of this while not having a stock that was dumped and shat all over by Swiss conscripts.
You literally have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
The K31 has never been "proved" to be unreliable in combat, you are just talking out of your ass.
The stock condition of the K31s that you idiots can buy in the USA comes from the fact that we ship the K31s that nobody buys in Switzerland to you and you guys still pay 300 bucks for a rifle that costs 20 bucks in Switzerland in that condition.
>>28252797
Only one I've owned was a 1942 Tula, but I've shot Izhevsk Hex 91/30 from the 30's, Finnish M39, Remington contract, M38, M44, Type 53 and an original 91/30 sniper, and many, many standard 91/30s. The M39 is the best of them, sure, but it's still at its heart a mediocre gun because the action design just isn't that good. Mausers across the board have smoother loading and smoother bolt cycling - no matter if they were made in Germany, Sweden, Belgium, America, Britain, China and so many other places. Just look at who adopted the Mosin design around the world as opposed to the Mauser designs. I mean, sure, the Americans used the for a time but it wasn't like that was particularly on purpose - that was "Oh shit Remington made 3 million of these things and those Russians are commies now, time for a bailout", but the M1903 was such a fucking Mauser copy they sued the American government and won. Other than that, pretty much just countries who got offloaded a shitload of Mosins or captured a shitload of them. Finland never built any Mosin receivers.
Mauser? Sold all over the world, copied almost as much under the table. Britain's pre-WWI plan was to rearm with Mausers - the P13. America already had. Even Belgium, where Nagant came from took Mausers over the Mosin.
Don't just take my word for it. Take pretty much every military that bought rifles from abroad in 1914. It wasn't like Tsarist Russia wouldn't have sold them Mosins, it's that if you had an army, and wanted a new bolt rifle, and you didn't design your own gun, you bought Mausers.
>>28253089
Also, how many companies currently make Mosins for the civilian market, as opposed to Mausers? And not conversions, I mean full guns, from brand-new receivers. The markets have spoken.
Mauser is best. Mosin a shit.
>>28253180
Alright, one. How many more?
Mausers and obvious Mauser derivatives are still made by Mauser, FN, CZ, Zastava, Winchester, Remington, countless custom shops, and more that I can't remember right now.
Why do people buy this old surplus crap from 100 years ago? I don't get it.
The calibers are rare and hard to find, they weigh 20+ pounds, and are often rusted/corroded/tarnished due to age.
You could go out and buy any modern rifle in any common caliber and it would be lighter, cheaper to shoot, just as accurate if not a little more so, and have widely available ammunition.
I cannot think of a single reason I'd rather have one of these over a new Winchester, Tikka, Browning, Ruger, Savage, etc.
I sincerely do not understand
>>28247795
Springfield 1903
>>28253257
That's fine, you don't have to.
>>28252521
Don't buy German ones, and they should go from anywhere around 300-600
>>28253257
My K31 looks brand new and shoots better than those new shit rifles.
>>28253257
History and interest. The same reason you might buy an old Mercedes instead of the latest soulless piece of safety tested efficiency, it feels like it has a soul.
If you ever handled a weapon that has seen real combat, you would know there is a feel to it, a little magic.
>>28253311
Let's see some groups so we can compare accuracy
How is carrying it a couple miles with a backpack?
How much did you pay for a box of ammo?
>new "shit rifle"
New shit rifles seem much better than old shit rifles.....
>>28247795
Mauser all the way, Finns are nice but they are also a niche market in the mosin world,
>>28253257
Because military history is one of my biggest interests.
>>28253285
IIRC Russian captures should still be in the sub $700 range.
>>28253398
60 round battle packs are about $20-30, and that's match grade shit.
>>28253398
I had 84 points last time I shot at 300m without any sort of help like bipods or other fag shit. I pay 45 Swiss Francs for 100 rounds of GP11.
My rifle shits on your new budget bullshit all day every day. I invite you to a shooting match in Switzerland any day you want, at 300m without optics, prone without any support.
I was just at a gun show today
The cheapest CHEAPEST mosin was $160....
it was a piece of fuckin trash
the nice ones were going for 350-500
I wouldn't even bother with them at that price point
I actually got my M44 for 250... but the thing is in AMAZING shape as if it was barely even fired. no bolt or trigger issues.
If you can find a deal, get one because there fun.
>>28255922
Took a fucking elk with my m44.
Beautiful gun too, glad I paid the extra 10 bucks for hand select.
Garand
>still using a bolt action service rifle
>it's 1941! i mean come on!
>>28254091
>muh swiss rifle
swiss rifle
>never been used in combat
>never been tested in combat
>nobody knows what will fail on it in combat
>rare ammo
>expensive
swiss rifles have never even been proven in combat in any way even slightly similar to the way that the mosins and mausers have been proven in combat
>>28256090
Irrelevant if it has been used in combat or not.
The training that our soldiers did during WWII showed the capabilities of this rifle. If a piece of shit like the Mosin can "work" as a main rifle of the soviet army, I have no doubts that the K31 would be even more superior.
Ammo is not rare.
>>28248619
my 250 dollar czech k98 is amazing
>>28256144
you are forgetting the mosin has glorious soviet engineering, everyone knows soviet guns don't break.
nobody knows anything about swiss engineering because it has never been tested, how can you trust a rifle that has never been tested in combat and not just training?
>>28252886
That's the Ishapore 2A.
The older Ishapore No1 MkIII* is still .303 British.
>>28255922
I just ordered one from Classic Firearms for 189.99$.
It's my first nugget.
How bad did I do?
>>28256272
>buying a meme gin
Hey, its your money to waste...
>>28256310
What do you buy, special snowflake?
>>28252521
Find yourself something on gunbroker or another auction and you can get a pretty good deal.
Got my k98 for $560, and that was two months after I bought a 91/30 for
>$190
>>28253257
>Ammo is rare to find
If you buy a nip rifle, maybe. In the age of the internet, it's hard not to find ammo.
>20+ pounds
Try 9 at worst
>Rusted/corroded
If they haven't been preserved properly, and I agree that buying one of those with the intent of shooting it is a bad idea.
>Muh modern raifu would be:
>Lighter
Probably
>cheaper to shoot
Not really
>Just as accurate if not more so
Yup
>Widely available ammo
Again, ammo for most of these guns is not hard to find.
There are not many practical reasons to buy the average surplus rifle, but at the same time they're not as bad as you make them out to be. They're on par or inferior to modern rifles in terms of price to accuracy potential ratio and I think most of them but the mosin have ammo that's also priced similarly to the modern stuff. What they do have going for them is they're durable, and they have iron sights so you don't have to shell out even more for glass just so you can shoot the rifle. They can also mount bayonets, which is nice if you're hunting hog, and while not sub usually MOA tack drivers they're still accurate enough for most purposes that aren't extreme long range shooting, which is a niche. Lots of these rifles will continue to be more accurate than half the people that shoot them.
This will, of course, differ if you're looking at a Finnish M39 vs Mauser vs Springfield vs Type 97.
The reasons to own these guns are more because you want to own a piece of history, or in the case of the ubiquitous mosin you want to make a project of accurizing it or just get into shooting very very cheaply. I understand these reasons may not hold much value to you personally, but they are valid reasons nonetheless.
>>28252688
>the russians copied the idea and most of the mechanics.
They copied absolutely none of the mechanics. The only thing you could remotely claim they copied was the idea of a long stroke gas piston attached to the bolt carrier. And of course they copied the idea. Don't conflate copying the general idea of a rifle with copying the design of the rifle.
>>28253311
Ah, its you again, Mr."I'm a good shot so the rifle is the best thing ever."
Keep gimping yourself. Pretty sure you're a troll anyway.
I bought a all matching m-48 still in box from my big 5 fistic manager for 300$
>>28259385
Disrict
>>28253022
Who cares what it looks like when the bores are the same condition - excellent on many.
They're never going to be as cheap here when they have to be imported either.
