|
Post by Horsie on Dec 20, 2018 9:14:13 GMT
The mags are kind of crap, I have this issue with my carbine every now and then where the mag locks up solid when it's empty; the follower won't move, the floor plate won't open, I end up having to remove the action from the stock and drop it back in, which fixes. God only know what the problem is, if it was some part of the stock rubbing or interfering you'd think it would happen all the time.
I got rid of a sporterized No.4Mk.1 Lee-Enfield, it didn't group especially well and I didn't see the point of keeping it when I've got another No.4 with full wood and a brand new barrel.
The other one was a sporterized Krag carbine in 6.5x55m, the bore was pretty bad, but I got it for next to nothing. Back in the day there was a place that would sell you a Krag-Jorgensen rifle or carbine and throw in a wheelbarrow full of corrosive Norwegian surplus ammo, a lot of them were bought by fishermen for hunting seals.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 24, 2018 1:16:17 GMT
Here's the M39;
I'm going to pull the action out of the stock and oil the metal I can't get at from the outside, as well as check the original markings on everything, the Finns basically assembled these from parts kits and modified stuff (like the triggers) as needed, even the M39, the last of their Mosins, used bolts, mags, receivers, and triggers off of old rifles purchased from other countries. Right now I know the receiver is from an older Tula produced rifle (pre or post-revolution I can't say just yet), but the date stamp should be on the underside of the receiver tang, the bolt body and bolt head are both from one of the guns made for the Tsarist army by Westinghouse in the US.
I'm used to Russian 91/30s, so this was actually a bit of a surprise, since it's more or less the same rifle, handles mostly the same, but doesn't feel like the same rifle. The sight picture is more or less the same, but setting the windage is far easier since the front post is adjusted by a pair of screws. The stock is thicker and more comfortable, especially with the semi pistol grip, it's one of the most substantial rifles stocks I've handled. The trigger is a proper 2-stage, and while the first stage is long and a bit spongy the second stage has a crisp break. The bolt cycles smoothly, I put about 40rnds through it today and didn't once have to beat the bolt open or closed.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 24, 2018 3:43:06 GMT
Yeah, mine starts to get sticky after ten or so shots, though I consider beating it open to be part of the charm. It's just amazing how much the M39 resembles a standard Mosin but is just miles apart from it in functionality. One of the more notable examples of taking a sow's ear and making a silk purse.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 24, 2018 3:55:41 GMT
The amazing thing is that almost all of the parts started as standard M1891s, Dragoon Rifles, or M91/30s, the Finns just cleaned them up. One of the first things I noticed was actually that the cocking piece doesn't move when I pull the trigger, on every other Mosin I've handled the cocking piece gets pulled downwards when the sear scraps across the engagement surface, making for a gritty, heavier trigger pull, but they polished the parts on this so there's no movement at all until the striker drops.
The Russians had the manpower to just throw numbers at an enemy, but the Finns didn't, so they needed a better rifle. They didn't have the money to get better rifles.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 24, 2018 4:34:47 GMT
Yeah, but the shocking thing is that the Russians could have had the manpower and, if they had put a little bit more work into it, a better rifle. I get that during a war there are bound to be fit and finish issues, but the rifle was manufactured for something going on 70 years with most of the same flaws it was designed with. Most of them were remanufactured at some point (or multiple points) and still left the factory with nobody even bothering to spend two seconds to polish the sear. Not to mention major issues like rimlock and sticky bolt which could spell death for a soldier. Your soldiers on your side. It's a mentality that's just impossible to grasp that you would knowingly arm your military with garbage just because there are plenty more people where that came from.
The Mosin-Nagant is practically a war crime.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 24, 2018 5:01:38 GMT
Even the Japanese kept improving their rifles, and the IJA is best known for (among other things) suicidal bayonet charges.
I think the problem with the rifles built in the Russian Empire is that the Russian military at the time was an unmitigated disaster even during peacetime, so it's probably a miracle they had repeating rifles at all.
As for the Soviet Union... dunno. I guess that's more proof that communism doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 28, 2018 5:18:55 GMT
The problem is how do you explain the AK-47? While not a perfect rifle it does succeed on every level that the Mosin fails at, plus some.
Anyway, so a friend of mine calls me up today to let me know he put in an order for a .500 S&W. Not sure why he needs something that outrageous, but I'll be more than happy to help him shoot it.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 28, 2018 6:53:04 GMT
Maybe assault rifles are just more forgiving?
So what if the fit and accuracy aren't as good as other rifles, and it's not 100% reliable? If your average soldier can usually hit a man at a few hundred yards, if the rifle works more often than it doesn't, then the advantage of having a large magazine and high volume of fire should make up for the rifle being crude and less accurate than comparable rifles.
Plus, I think part of the problem with the Mosin is that it was probably the worst rifle in WW1, or at least the most outdated, and it didn't get any better between then and 1941, so the problems with it really stand out.
That's the sort of gun you fire once, just to say you've done it, and then never fire it again.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 29, 2018 2:08:15 GMT
From what I've seen of folks that own a .500 S&W, they only take it to the range so other people can shoot it.
Though if you buy .500 special ammo the recoil is about the same as a .44 Mag, and most folks can handle that.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 29, 2018 2:11:55 GMT
Maybe assault rifles are just more forgiving?
Could be. Seems that automatic and semi automatic actions can have a lot of slop and still function well, where the same can't be said for a bolt action. Considering loose tolerances seemed to be a selling point of the AK-47.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 29, 2018 3:24:29 GMT
That wouldn't be so bad, though at the same time I think I'd rather have the .44mag, a .500 would probably be pretty tiring to hold on target, and I'm not sure I could fit one in my pistol safe without buying a second one.
A bolt action ought to be accurate and reliable, because really that's all it's got going for it since they're not fast to fire and the mags are usually pretty small.
The funny thing with the AK is that while those loose tolerances certainly are a selling point, the people who claim it's because they can run while filled with shit and corruption seem to have it wrong; no rifle can run with a receiver full of mud, and the loose fit and big openings in the receiver make it easier for dirt to get in, but it does mean they should handle fouling and a bit of rust better than something with tight tolerances, it's an idea gun for soldiers who probably won't bother with basic care of their weapon.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 29, 2018 6:34:22 GMT
Yeah, if you're gonna just shoot something with .44 Mag power you might as well buy a .44 mag. Smaller frame, lighter weight, more rounds in the cylinder.
If you stuff a gun full of mud or sand it's not going to run no matter how well or poorly made it is. I think the advantages to loose tolerances is that when stuff does get in you can just dunk it in water to rinse it out if you need to, they're also more likely to run with poor maintenance and/or over oiling. The second part is the real reason it became so popular with so many militaries cuz you can't always rely on your soldiers to clean their gun regularly. If he's squatting in a rice paddy during monsoon season he might not have a chance to.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 29, 2018 7:36:48 GMT
Plus you have some options with .44mag, as far as I know the only pistols chambered for .500S&W are the Model 500 and something from Thompson Center.
Exactly, and with the AK a little surface rust on some of the parts isn't as likely to cause problems as it would with something that had tight tolerances, like an AR15.
There's such a thing as over oiling?
Speaking of crap guns, did you ever read about the British L85A1? They discovered so many reliability issues during the Gulf War that they had the rifles rebuilt by H&K, who replaced the furniture, the entire bolt carrier group, the barrel and barrel extension, the gas system, all of the springs and pins, and modified the fire control group and receiver, as well as some of the controls.
You know you've fucked up when rebuilding a rifle into a working weapon requires replacing everything short of the receiver, and even that has to be modified.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Dec 30, 2018 23:57:32 GMT
Don't know much about it, but I know someone who does.
Another issue where the attempt to cover up the problem made the problem all that much worse.
Of course. Especially if your ammo is dirty, or if you are in a dusty or very cold environment. Excess oil will allow crud to build up in the action faster and in the cold it can freeze. You can try a test yourself by taking a semi-auto .22lr (an excessively dirty ammo type) and goober on the oil in the action. You'll find it fouls in very short order as opposed to the same rifle lightly oiled.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Dec 31, 2018 0:47:29 GMT
I watched that again the other night after posting about the SA80. That just strikes me as typical of equipment designed and built in the UK; the idea is great, the execution is poor.
I'm sure things would've played out better if they just acknowledged that the rifle had some issues that only revealed themselves in a hot, dusty environment, and they were already hard at work addressing them.
True, that's why machine guns with cartridge oilers seem to fall into two categories; ones that were found to work just fine without the oiler, and ones that didn't work.
That might be another thing that people have misconceptions about though. I've had a few people tell me that over oiling is outright dangerous and can destroy a gun, one told me it happened to his uncle, he oiled a rifle too much and it exploded while he was hunting. I was talking to a guy at a gun store/range here, and he said they had some serious issues with their Norinco AR15 carbine not functioning properly and constant parts breakage, he insisted it was because the gunsmith oiled it too much, not because a single day of use at their range probably exceeded it's service life.
|
|