Im living in Finland and my most loved hobby is hunting chicken birds, sometimes using ski's. 30km are not far on ski's, especially if you move through your own area that you know very well. Here you can stay hidden in the thick forest while getting to where you need to, so with the right route selection enemy contact is a low threat. Using optics in this environment is a pain, no anti fog really works and after opening the lens covers you have a short window in which the optic is useful, so the zf is worthless. Also the Mauser loadout is heavy with all that ammo that you won't need. I take the mosin, because it will work in this environment better, take about 2 minutes to find around 10 rounds for it and bail. A sleak gun and good, tight sling is critical here, but I assume it is mounted on the mosin. Most russians had to move on foot at that time, so as long as I stay out of sight they should not be able to chase even they find my tracks. If they are on foot, the lighter I am the less chance they have to catch up. After skiing a few kilometers I would take a break and eat/drink as much as possible to fill up my energy and to get even lighter. The whole trip should not take longer than 3 hours.
Very good answer. Swedish former arctic ranger here and I will also say that antifog is not fun and a good sling is important if going on skiis. Only one long sling will be a pain, so fixing it on the chest is better. But dual sling on the back is perfect unless the rifle is banging on your ass. 10 rounds and go.
Option 2. Save time by not having to scrounge for ammo. The most important thing is speed and avoiding detection by the enemy. While the Zf41 isn't great it could be used to spot and identify targets from further away than my naked eye. This could make avoiding enemy patrols and linking up with friendlies easier. My goal is to get back and avoid fights if possible.
@@mercifulephesian9359 Wouldn't the straight bolt of the m39 be nuisance while skiing getting jabbed into your bag? As well as having more potential of doing a nasty wound if you fell on top of it. I'm not sure since I've never carried the rifle slinged buy I'm curious never the lesss
@@shikuro The m39 was designed for skiing. The ski sling attachments allow the bolt to be parallel to your body so you don't come in contact with it. Just look up pictures of Finnish Ski troopers and you will understand what I'm talking about.
While I find the arguments about the loaded firearm and a head start being a better option, I think there are some arguments in favour of the M39 that should be noted. - Being a Finnish soldier trained to move on skis would likely mean that you could move significantly faster than dismounted infantry over terrain that would not be accessible by armor or trucks - potentially somewhat negating the need to immediately get away quickly. - Iron sights are preferable for snap engagements, which would be most likely in this scenario. Despite it's "scout" configuration, the scoped Kar98k is not preferable for chance encounters with patrols, and I doubt you would be settling into a firing position to take longer-range shots, for fear of disclosing your location. Additionally, the minimal magnification advantage of the Zf. 41 would only have a small benefit for scouting the way forward, assuming we don't also have issued binoculars on our person. - I believe the M39 was set up with a sling amenable for skiing - as a former competitive XC skier, this would make a massive difference in terms of ensuring the rifle is cinched against the body and the weight is well distributed while skiing. - Depending on the model, the Zf. 41 sight adjustment could seize up in cold weather - not that you would be making sight adjustments... you just have to hope that it's zeroed when you picked it up. - A slung firearm with a scope is susceptible to being banged around on the body and losing zero while skiing. A firearm with iron sights is significantly less susceptible to this issue. - Anyone who has carried/used a scoped rifle in the cold knows that scopes are susceptible to being packed with snow or frosting up. Additionally, the argument that you would need to take more time to scavenge ammo seems moot, as you've already been looking around for ID tags and maps, but now I'm nitpicking.
I would imagine the ZF was set up pretty well for winter travel already but your observations are worth paying attention to for sure. As you know this is all about the travel. Good argument about the iron sights too, I tend to be more at home with them myself.
@@duginashley3199 perhaps, however I don't know if you'd want to be messing about with unscrewing the mount with cold hands in cold weather, especially not in a high-pressure situation.
I agree, with the Mauser choice, as you know the rifle is in good working order due to it being from a member of your unit.. My only concerns would be how long the rifle has been in the snow, and I am unsure if the optics were filled with nitrogen back then, so I don’t know if the glass would fog. I also don’t know how well the Mauser preforms when frozen vs the M39.
M39, it works always and it will be easier to find ammo for from the dead. And your training with long arms does not encompass optics use and the zed f was not a great scope in lower light conditions such as in heavy forest.
The M39 solely because you most likely will be more familiar with the platform. Waking up dazed and confused I would not want to use a platform I am less familiar with.
Also a good answer. The fact that as a finnish soldier you would already be familiar with the mosin means that it would more likely be a handicap to try and use a mauser with an unfamiliar german scope.
And You are probably used to it from training, You would not be able to utilise the benefit of the scope, maybe as a monoscope, but You would already have one if You are the squad leder, likwise with the the map. But as some one else said, should I bother with a rifle at all, maybe a handgun for close defense, not a rifle for long range offense, and in the finnish forests a scope for long range shooting? The line of sight may be max 250 to 300 yards often max 50 to 100 yards. If the enemy is seen, keep Your head down, if You run in to them, send some rounds with Your L35, and run/ski as if the Red Army is after You.
Agreed, if you'll looking for intell and ID (and wallets), you're going to find and pocket ammo. Use what you know, particularly since the Mosin is designed for these conditions.
@@dmg4415 Even if I have to leave bodies behind, the maps are coming with me. They're intell to the other side, and it should be secured and either taken with or destroyed. Ditto any thing the radio man had. If I'm not dead, I have to assume the enemy didn't check bodies, and I don't want to bank too hard on their lack of competence twice in a row.
Having ammo ready without scavenging is good, but Kar98k's caliber is different than M39. And since Soviets' rifle uses the same cartridge as the M39, I'd risk it a bit and take that and ammo from one body. Also, as I wouldn't have a scope, I don't have to worry about scope glint. My answer, Kar98k is better on the short term, but M39 edges out in the long term.
Yeah. Unless we're Simo Haya with cheat codes enabled, you're alone so if any enemy force catches you then your chances are slim no matter what you have. At best (Or worst really, since your best chances lie in avoiding a fight in the first place) you'll be using your weapon to deter, deny or most likely just slow down pursuit, not trying to take down an entire enemy squad or platoon by yourself. You've already searched the bodies for tags and intel, so pick up the loaded, imperfect weapon and ski like your life depends on it. Because it does.
Being intimately familiar and capable with your bolt action weapon isn't going to mean much if 20+ soldiers/partisans catch you alone. Not unless you're incredibly talented, incredibly lucky, and in an incredibly good position, anyway. Under *any* other circumstances I'd agree and say the M39 all day every day, but under the specific conditions laid out here and being realistic... if you end up in a firefight with the pursuing force, you've probably made a fatal mistake.
Option 1- As explained by my Grandfather who was part of the USARAL Ski program during the Cold war. -Go with what you where trained with. If you are a Finnish soldier then you would be more familiar with the M39 rife. (If it malfunctions, you know how to clear and clean it. You know its weight, its accuracy, and its quirks.) -The M39 was designed to be slung while skiing. (Baggage, especially when it's something you are unfamiliar with, is always going to be an annoying hassle when skiing. It can even go as far as injuring you. Proper sling attachments are a must) - Lastly you would have an approximate time for you being knocked out. Your radio man would have had a watch. (I was a radio man, I had a standard issue watch. It would be difficult to do your job without one. But even without a watch you could not have been knocked out for more than a few minutes at most. Any more than that and you would be suffering from a nasty concussion and you wouldn't be making it far. If you only have ~19 miles to go then it will only take you around an hour and a half to get there on skis, give or take 20 minutes. That's going 10-20 miles an hour in the Forrest, 30+ miles an hour if you get any downhill slopes.)
I would leave both guns at the site and ski as fast as possible because agains reinforcements my speed is the best defense. Also you can ski faster without rifle...
I am Australian and my skiing ability is best summed up by "I think the pointy bits go forward". I'm going to die either way so the rifle is academic! 😂
Congratulations mate. You are firmly on your way to be proper arctic trooper. (Flashbacks of massive pileup of men during return trip from shooting range. Downhill and 200 guys don´t mix well.)
@James Healy: think of it this way: you got there on skiis, so you would have already learned to use them beforehand. And cross country skiing is far easier and faster to learn (in my personal experience) than downhill skiing.
@@FieryCheeze The Germans found in 1941 winter that non of their equipment is usable in the extreme cold. K98 has tolerances that are to tight to function ok in extreme cold
The most likely choice given to one in this situation would be neither. Because the victorious partisans would have taken anything the could find and carry with them and destroyed what they could not carry. If they for some reason had missed the two rifles, the ready to go 98 it is. My best chance for survival is getting the f..out. In any firefight I'm likely f...ed because I'm alone and they aren't.
You see, you always have choices. Yes, the partisans could come back.....but why? There's the question of why the Intel is still available. The Mauser isn't reliable in Sub-Zero combat. The Russians found them with frozen bolts as they stripped the dead. This whole exercise is designed to make you consider Sub-Zero combat.
@@Plumpplumberbalding that came from the German gun oil and I would assume any Germans serving with the Finn's have leaned that lession and if the radio guy loans a k98 from a German you better bet he is going to cycle the bolt and when it's frozen reoil it
Norwegian here, been on Skis since I was 2. M39. It's empty, and I'll get the bandolier or 5 laying about in my newly found cemetery. Also, why would I take that long? It's cold as Satan, I'm hurrying up and getting the first couple of bandoliers, more than enough ammo for my purposes. The M39 is something I'm used to as a snow Santa, compared to the K98. The K98 optic might also snag, especially since I'm on skis. I want it to be as easy as possible to retrieve the rifle should I need it. Optic could also freeze, not dealing with it. If I had an extra set of binocs, that'd be best. It's going to take me a couple minutes to orient myself, find my skis, make sure the bindings are good, and set off. I'm going to do my best not to assault anyone and if I do, I'm one tired Finn on skis, I don't stand much of a chance against a group without my Suomi. Biathlon is difficult, and being on Skis while dealing with recoil, etc on a full-powered cartridge, yuck, doing my utmost to avoid that. I'm going to be focused on using my other senses and staying out of harm's way, carefully retreating while taking full advantage of my hopefully white snow PJ's. Should the feces hit the Finnish speaking snow, I'm going to be primarily looking for movement, actively avoiding engagement. The scope is cool and whatnot, but the distances aren't so great that the scope is absolutely necessary. I'll be like Rokki and try to have a cozy trip back. Thank god I didn't have to carry the fucking Maxim gun. Cool scenario.
The m39. As an former lieutenant in the FDF i must say that the m39 is better suited for the winter and of course a normal conscript isn't taught the use of an scope. The m39 also had a bigger trigger guard so the gun could be operate with thick gloves on that would aid in the soldier to not get frostbit in the freezing winters. The average range of an engagement is under 200 meters / 220 yards since most of the Finnish / soviet border is covered by thick pine forests so the scope of the kar98k is almost useless. The 15 minutes of gathering ammunition isn't a big deal since you have skis that you can escape much faster than the soviet troops since the soviets never issued skis to their soldiers. If the soviets dont kill you its going to be the cold. An average soldier was taught basic survival skills in the continuation war so they could survive a night in the freezing nights of the Finnish winters. a average soldier could ski around 6km/h while the soviets would have really hard time walking threw the over a meter of snow witch would bog down the soviets to a crawl, This was an actual tactic used by the Finns to quickly engage the soviets and then ski away. Happy to answer any questions.
Neither. A 19mile crosscountry ski trip is bad enough, trying to pack a full length rifle with ammunition is no bueno. With no support I sure as hell am not getting into a fire fight. I'm beating feet or hiding, not looking to engage the enemy. Returning alive with intel is priority. But, if I absolutely have to pick, the K98k. Slightly shorter, quite a bit lighter, ammunition already on hand, useable optical sight (I'm near-sighted so ironsights alone are not ideal). Done and done.
You can't properly sling a Kar98k with skis. It does not have the Ski sling attachments. You are better off taking the m39 and getting some ammo. Ski troopers where trained to go long distances with a light load. That being your rifle and ammo and some rations.
@@mercifulephesian9359 My great grandfather was one of those guys. I would take my training rifle rk62/76. And no. The long distance patrols behind enemy lines are not carrying light loads. 15 years ago when I did my service we skiid ~100km at the time of 22 hours give or take with full equipment. Thats about 25-30 kilograms of what you have in your backpack only + gun. But if would have to choose it between the two of those it would be m39
@@gringostarr69 Okay. I have some issues with what you are saying. Maybe you can clear them up for me. A standard infantry load in NATO forces is 40-63kilos (90-140lb). So 20-30kilos (40-65lb) is a light infantry load. Which goes with what I stated was the standard for Ski Troopers. Next you are saying you skied 100 kilometers (62miles) in a 21-23 hour period. That means your average speed was 5.3 kilometers an hour (3.3 mph) which is only slightly faster than the average rate for marching infantry at 4kilos an hour (2.5mph). Granting you both with a standard rest of 10 minutes each hour for a total of ~3.6 hours of rest in a 22 hour period. How was it that you where skiing so slowly?
@@mercifulephesian9359 a querilla patrol carries it's full gear + tent + stove and some other stuff like radio + batteries + mines and so on so that averages about 100 kilos divided with 9-10 people in cycles. The skiing trip I was talking about was not skiing on a flat surface but with really high climbs that took about 30mins and while you got to skii on frozen lake your skiis would pile up with slush at the bottom of them every 5mins and you needed to clean them. Not really sure how much weight we had on board at that horrific occation, but I'm telling you. We had been training for a year and were concidered as an elite squad and that was the most toughest thing I had to go through in a day. Some of the guys were seeing frigerators skiing next to them at the end of the journey and they were professional athletes. And like I said. It is 15 years ago. Don't really remember the exact weight of what we usually carried with us. We normally hid rations of days of food packages for to be collected later on. Water is the most essential one that you carry. You might be right that the weight wasnt right but im getting old (unlike the other 20 friend that were in our unit and had to learn morse code too), but I'm still thinking fondly of those times.
Seeing the K98 and having time of the essence take it and go. Having a full bandolier of ammo to have off the bat is really nice. I like the idea of having a ZF41 and trying to keep relative distance from any enemy. Also seeing how effective it is from the video InRange TV at engaging enemy’s at different distances quickly is a huge plus. Their performance with optic in that video showed how good the ZF-41 is at picking out targets and engaging quickly and accurately. For those reasons that’s my pick. Best option for keeping my distance and if a firefight breaks out I have the the plus of the ZF-41.
@Zoomer Waffen damn bro, if you actually stopped watching ww2 meme compilations and maybe just opened a wikipedia article you would know that the russian winter is what halted the germans. But go ahead and make fun of the american education system even though Im not even american lol
Nights coming. Likely weather too. Shelter, water and fire are probably more important. If weathers on your side and it’s a full moon you can probably navigate safely someplace safer.
I honestly think the cold weather is going to be a bigger factor in operability. There were brutally cold temperatures in Finland at that time. Better to eat the time and have a rifle that works. M-39
My familiarity is with the mauser platform. I'm also rather fond of chargers that work well. It's lighter, and I need to move quickly. The time needed to grab ammo for the m39 is the real clincher in my opinion.
M39. If we are realistic about the training a Finnish soldier had in time period it would not have covered the K98 or the Zf.41. And as for the time advantage, you have to recover tags and sensitive documents anyway, ammo would not add much time to that chore. The Zf.41 is a finnicky and difficult to use optic, and for a Finnish regular, or me with years of optics use on firearms, the Zf.41 is a liability and even more so when you are trying to learn how to use it on the go, alone. Besides in the event of contact, the goal is to minimize interaction, not go on some Call of Duty power fantasy one man crusade.
Im grabbing the K-98 with ZF41 scope. 1) it's loaded & good to go. 2) having a DMR scope enables me to make the most of my limited ammo (slim chance of coming across anymore in the 30km back to friendly lines). 3) The K98 with ZF41 enables a better shot on target ratio (if you know what you're doing / how to employ it). If you're that far behind enemy lines you'll only want to be engaging the enemy on your terms (1-3 man groups max)....if at all. Engaging enemy groups any larger will likely bring about your hasty end, as they'll be able to fire & move on you / your position. Only engage when absolutely necessary. 4) Should the scope go down, you've still got your standard Iron Sights to fall back on. 5) the 15 minutes head start it affords is equally valuable when on the run behind enemy lines. 6) without going out of your way...grab a pistol as a 2nd weapon if you come across one (it won't slow you down)...as you may need it if/when it gets to a close up fight...for the enemy...or ...
For me i would take the Finnish M39. I say I'm a decent shot with scopes but i love iron sights, lots of range time and hunting time behind firearms with no optics. List of other reasons 1. I know for sure ammo is available even if i have to salvage it 2. Even if i only find 20, 30 rounds I'll be fine since i personally would try my best to not engage in combat 3. Scopes can fog up 4. Who knows if the zero was knocked out of place or not. Rather not find out the hard way. 5. M39 is currently number one on my need to own list been hunting for one for a while now.
bro a bolt gun is a bolt gun is a bolt gun, the manual of arms for both is almost identical beyond the K98 being able to close on it's clips without breaking them, and it's loaded anyway, plus bruh, G L A S S
@@reesetompkins7987 so you are telling me that you would go against a platform that you familiar with and run another firearm that you may have no experience with at all? I get that a bolt gun is a “bolt gun” but what is that G L A S S zeroed at? Do you have a time to see your splash and correct it and get some dope...or run what you know 🤔
Folks, which rifle is designed for Sub-Zero operation? The Russians found a lot of German infantry dead with frozen bolts. I've lived in really cold weather before, and grease and oil glue up. The Russians cut their weapons lube with gasoline. Made it real thin, but worked. The Finns were even better at cold weather combat. That Mauser is like rat cheese. If you've checked your dead for gear, you've already put ammo in your pouch. That Mauser is a fancy.
@@Plumpplumberbalding Except written right in the mission brief is "You will need an extra 10-15 minutes to gather ammunition form your perished squadmates.", along with "Time is of the essence" - why the ammo wasn't gathered earlier, guess we'll have to wait for the livestream to answer that.
Grab the mauser and scoot. If you get going quick enough, you hopefully won't need to shoot it. If you stick around looking for cartridges you run a much higher chance of seeing action, which is suicidal since you are alone. So the mauser for expediency. Speed is the mission objective(report the action) speed is life.
The M39 is very nice, but i life and breath vor 98k IRL, i trust my Life anytime on this Rifle. + Time is Key, so move up. If the Scope makes any Problem, i can rip it off and use Ironsights.
Option 1, I know the rifle will work in cold environment and is designed to be used with skiing. While the 10-15 minutes make take a bit, it's worth it in a firefight where i am using a more familiar weapon than the imported rifle. The m39 does have excellent iron sights and doesn't give away my position if I have to hide. The ammo quality it top notch compared the German substandard steel case. Overall, the m39 is a clear winner.
I am so excited to see 9Hole Reviews with forgotten weapons making a video together, that means 1.30 hours of pure quality video not to mention the History background!!! Nice team up!!!
Op 2. Its loaded, and you have plenty of spare ammo, meaning you can leave the combat zone quicker, and get out of the elements sooner, as well as possibly slip the noose if those partisans come back. The scope is also handy, letting you not only pick targets up at longer range but also disseminate friendlies from hostiles before a blue-on-blue.
The loaded Mauser. 1) The finnish soldiers showed how efficient they were with skis. The soviets will have a hard time to catch you 2) Taking the M39 means you hope to find dead bodies and take their ammo. But with the red army not that far, you don't want to waste your time searching ammo 3) A loaded mauser allows you to shoot an enemy to take his gun, but an empty M39 doesn't 4) Having billions of 7.62 x 54R is pointless because you don't want to fight the red army alone
I'm going to disagree with the hive mind here. I'm going to grab the Mosin and take a few minutes to scrounge some ammo from my fallen mates. I want the better cold weather performance that the Mosin provides. It shouldn't take long to find a few pouches of 7.62x54r. I wouldn't need much ammunition to sprint back to the Finnish lines. If I get caught in a firefight, I'm screwed anyway. ETA: I've already gathered intelligence, maps, dog tags, etc. Why couldn't I have scrounged ammo too? I say I did, and so there isn't any time lost.
M39. Banging that scope around on your back isn't going to do the zero any favours. The M39 is a far superior rifle and can reach out much farther. Familiarity with the fire arm and terminal ballistics is going to be important as your going to want to engage a the longest distance possible so the enemy cover so you can keep moving. Ammo might be a problem but you going to want to stay away from engaging the enemy so don't need a whole pack full. Plus looking for ammo would give a opportunity to preclude a pistol with a mag or two and that could be a life saver if cqb takes place. I don't know what the K thinks of snow and ice compared to the Mosin but that could be a factor too. Anyway M39 thanks.
Finnish m39. Reason 1 if you make it back to finnish lines or what ever ammunition you run across in the process will be 54r. 2 I would rather have the report of my rifle sound like everyone else's in the area. 3 the scope on the mauser is pretty terrible. 4 you are now on your own, in a bad situation the time you take to gather ammunition should also be spent gathering whatever other supplies you can carry from the dead. 5 the m39 was designed to be skied with the mauser not so much, And the scope will fog in the cold.
I am an American of Norwegian descent, do nordic skiing, have hunted whitetails in knee deep snow in Michigan's upper peninsula for 50 years and am a former small bore competitor. I would choose the M39, primarily for dependability. I have both of those rifles in my house now and know their respective weaknesses and strengths. I can tell you that I have had a 98 freeze up due to the smallest drop of water drawn up by capillary action between the striker and the bolt shroud, then freezing. Hunting, drawing down on a deer and taking the second stage of a trigger out and having nothing happen is a very bad feeling. In a conflict it would be the last feeling that you would have.
M39 even though I have to gather some ammo. Reason- reliability of sight system in snow, falling, blowing etc, scope can have issues with snow, needing cleaning etc etc. open sights will not fail quicker target acquisition
K98k, Reasoning being theres a full bandolier of ammo, and that extra 15 mins gives me a head start over whatever hunter force is possibly coming behind me, my intention is to not get bogged down by fighting and keep moving to cover as much ground as possible so the rifle is only there for a last ditch "shit hit the fan/do or die" scenario, you also get a bit of extra little help with regards to seeing further up in front of you with the small amount of magnification the Zf41 offers to help me avoid anyone i dont want to be bumped by and spot friendles that i do.
In all honesty, the rifle is more about having a teddybear then an anything else. I would just pick the Kar 98 because it is convenient. In reality I would be trying to avoid a fight and just trying to move as undetected and as fast as possible. Possibly it would even be better to just leave both rifles behind and move that much faster, however, you can at least deal with a man or two if absolutely forced into a fight.
Still own 2 SKY M39. Both Sako. Owned original Kar98k with Zf41. Still own other 98ks. Grab the K98k and get moving. M39 is much heavier. Time to bug now and fast. The bad guys will be back soon and following your ski traces like wolves.
The name of the game here is evasion. Ideally you won't fire the rifle once on your way back, and any slight advantage you can get to aid in that goal is worth having. A rifle with a scope would be valuable for identifying things at a distance. If the worst were to happen and you were forced to engage, being able to pick priority targets would be far more valuable than being able to take more shots at indistinct man shaped blobs. The goal is not a body count but the ability to hobble your pursuers at a range where they are less capable of retaliation. And, as many have pointed out, the k98 is loaded, allowing you to fill that unforgiven minute with 60 seconds worth of distance run. Though Honsetly, in that precise situation, I'd take the scope off the rifle and ski for safety with as light a load as possible.
Mauser. optic will give you some enhanced range when clearing your path ahead as you make your way and there is ammo readily available. Optics will also give an advantage when discerning what's what, say in a treeline across a large open area and you are gonna want every possible advantage to making a rapid hit if you do get into an encounter as a solo person. The Mauser is also slightly shorter so when going through brush, less length to hang up on stuff. The turn down bolt handle is arguably better with more leverage than a straight bolt handle and would sling across your back more comfortably whilst skiing, but that is a dubious argument over one or the other. Disadvantages are possibly knocking the zero off if you take a spill, but you can readily remove the scope and go back to irons.
M39, why? 1. It's your daily Finnish rifles, at least you will familiar a bit, and it's already tuned for Finnish climate area 2. Your mission is to survive, not to kill, a reflection from a scope can be dangerous 3. While you searching for ammo, you could also pick some dog tags too
M39 if I feel that time can be spared. If I'm going around to collect tags, I figure grabbing loose clips shouldn't be much more an ask. If I feel too pressed for time that I don't want to even collect tags, 98k. I am biased toward the M39 as I own and regularly shoot one. The sights are fantastic and the Finn modifications to the Mosin receivers do tend to make the M39s run well. The minor magnification from the German optic I don't think even worth considering. Best case for magnification is that you find a pair of binoculars while collecting tags. Also, if the Finn WW2 loads are like the recreated handloads, the ammo is also great for precision shooting.
I would take the car 98k with optic and ammunition and 15 minute Head start realistically if I get into an engagement I'm probably gone anyway if it's any more than a few enemy combatants and I doubt I'd be able to burn through all the ammunition that bandolier is carried before I am either killed or I kill them and if I need more ammunition I can always switch back over to the enemy's weapons and ammo if needed though i think avoiding engagement is Paramount at this point
Speed may not be the right approach. If you are behind enemy lines, presumably, you will have to cross a guarded position at some point. A direct confrontation wouldn't work, so you will have to sneak by. Snow trails are easy to track and difficult to obscure. Retrace your patrol's tracks to find a relatively safe position away from the ambush, wait for a snowstorm, then race toward friendly lines while your tracks are covered. Success will likely depend on the weather, so pick the gun best suited for the weather you hope for - m39
I’ll have to go with the K98k and put as much distance between myself and the enemy as possible. Since I’d be alone I’m pretty sure if they catch up to me I’m toast regardless of weapon I have.
Kar98 as it is ready and In Good Faith. Also an optic to scan ahead is a nice tool to have and the longh eye relief optic keeps you more aware of your environment similar to iron sights. Binoculars are better but a scope vs nothing is also better.
M39 all day, that low power scope is of very little use when the idea is to E&E and hopefully make it to friendly lines, the rifle has a somewhat better reputation for working in extreme cold, and your commanders in the rear will probably be less unhappy with you for losing the weapon you were issued if you bring back one of your homeland's weapons rather than pick up a novelty enemy weapon along the way. Do grab the K98 bolt and stomp on the scope before you leave though.
As a former Swedish army ranger, i would chose the Kar 98 K. You have the ammo now, and also the scope will help you to spot targets. The Mauser action is smoother and the trigger is crisper as well. Stripper clips will help you reload faster as well.
If I trusted the proper Arctic maintenance of the 98k, I were familiar with how to clear the typical malfunctions it had, and the glass were unscathed, I'd take that. Going body to body to retrieve ammo from fallen cohorts in what looked like 12 to 18 inches of powder would take a fair amount of energy and probably expose my fingers to more cold than I'd prefer. That leaves more energy for the ski back to safety, more time, and less time searching bodies to possibly rattle me. Additionally, the scope would give me an opportunity to glass the surroundings during the one or two planned water and snack breaks I'd likely try to take (if I didn't have any binoculars for that already). The ability to possibly distinguish targets a little better is nice, but the better part of it all is the lower energy cost to me. Even with a pair of ski's, collecting ammo would be a lot of work.
M39. It was designed with this climate in mind. The optics of the day were more crude, prone to fogging and not as robust as iron sights. Also, if you are already taking the time to retrieve intel and I’d discs, time needed to grab extra ammo off the dead isn’t going to take that long and the common caliber can be easily resupplied if needed.
Kar89 you need to move quickly plus more observations with scope that my pick loved the last pick one livestream keep up the great content stay safe stay well to you and yours all the best from Scotland 🏴
Kar98 with the optic. 1. the optic is a potential force multiplier even if it is removed and just used as a telescope. 2. there is an easier time gathering the ammunition and time is of the essence and resupply is unlikely. Ideally it'd be best just to book it as fast and lightly as possible on the skis so the addition of either rifle adds to weight but since we have to choose we choose the fasts loaded option.
I live in Alaska and do both xc and tele. 30km would be about 3 hours on a track to possibly 6 hours if breaking trail off track through the woods. Figure the enemy would be at least 2 hours away with carrying wounded. I would take the M39 (better sling, lighter weight, weapon I had trained with), and source 10 rounds of ammo. I would also strip the bolts from any rifles and ditch them, pull dog tags and any other compromising information. Take 2 liters of water and some bread. Drink 1 liter and start skiing: skate the first 20 minutes than kick-n-glide for 40. Stop at an hour, take a pee, drink 1/2 the water, eat half the bread. Repeat. E&E at this point.
The scout style scope is actually a great advantage in the cold since it doesn't fog up in the cold, that's why the norwegian army used them for so long. So for that and other reasons, the Mauser, clearly.
Because the first option was our Army issue I quickly pop some pervitin which allows me to gather the required items for the task and ski 250km in record time.
The kar98k, not only do you not have to search for ammo but you get a superior sighting system on top making it easier to both ID patrols (assuming you have no binoculars) and decide to engage or avoid as well as making it easier to make corrections. Even if the sight zf41 would go foggy due to the weather you could always simply detach it from the rifle and use the k98 with iron sights without the disadvantage of scope glint giving away your position. Yes resupply would be harder but I doubt you'd want to take many engagements as a lone man and rather just right out avoid combat and I'm assuming the bandolier would have 100 to 50 rounds worth of ammo. The only other huge problem with sight is zeroing is a pain in the ass but if we are assuming it's factory zero then it shouldn't be a factor and again you can just ditch the sight if you have to
@@stevelavalette6898 no need. The M39 wasn't fielded until the Continuation War. The Winter War was primarily M28, M28/30 (awesome rifle), M91, M91/24, and Suomi M31.
@@stevelavalette6898 so you are going to ignore the fact I agreed the m39 is a fantastic rifle, and ignore the point I made that the entire scenario revolves around the fact that you are being pursued and time is of the essence. Which means you ignored my entire statement to post a smug response. Good job looking like a stuck up jack ass. Good luck taking on an entire platoon of soviet troops with one, admittedly good 5 shot bolt action rifle, while 30 kilometers from any chance of help.
As an owner of a Sako M39 I would easily say I would take that. The ammo supply problem would be significantly alleviated due to shared ammo with the Soviets. I also know I can change my sling to work well with skiing. The scope on on K98K is nice but doesn't do it for me enough to make me change my mind. 1.5x zoom really isn't that much and I would rather scrounge around for someone's binoculars or something instead. Also I would avoid firing any shots unless absolutely necessary and that would most likely mean one range where the M39 iron sights are fine. My first and last priority would be to get back to my lines as quickly quickly safely as possible. I'm not there to make a one man last stand I'm trying to return to my unit
Option 2. Since your primary carry weapon was an SMG time on system isn't a factor unless you assume they used the M39 in basic. Time is a critical factor and a loaded rifle with ammo will spare you having to search for ammo when the enemy could return at any moment. The goal here is to move and get back to friendly forces, not fight or hold off the enemy. My only concern is using the Kar98 while on skies. I have no experience with that type of situation and not sure how difficult using a scope would be while skiing.
The limitations on auxiliary gear in WW2 would lean me towards taking the 98k just for the optic. If I can see half a mile more clearly, I can move faster on the snow and avoid any sov patrols. If I take the entire bandoleer and the rifle there is less evidence that someone survived. Give the suomi to the ghost on the ground and save some time scrounging. If enemy reinforcements are 3 miles out, I have about 30 minutes before someone gets to the ambush site. If I plant the suomi and yank the 98k and leave right away, I get 30 minutes of travel, on top of leaving fewer traces behind, on top of having some vision magnification. I have 19 miles, getting into a gunfight is not an option for the objective. 19 miles on skis is about 6 hours of travel, plus breaks, figure about 10+ hours until I reach friendly territory. My probability for survival gets to zero if I get into a gunfight. I could toss the bandoleer into a creek, saving a pocketful of rounds.
Walking in tourskis is quite slow, if have done it a few times. So I would take the Mauser, because if I got in to an engagement, I would like to keep the longest distance to the enemy. So the scope is the most important factor for me
I'd grab the K98 , but I'd also spend as little time possible trying to find some ammunition for the M39 , it's what I'm familiar with and wouldn't need to worry about learning the ergos of the K98 . I'd hope that my knowledge of the area and skill of skiing would give an advantage of speed to make up for the time spent searching for ammunition for the M39
I would slightly favor option 1: A) Cold. Both rifles have been sitting in the snow for potentially hours, mauser bolt could seize up. Also You don't know if the scope will lose zero or fog up. B) Familiarity, bolt guns are all pretty similar but you still probably know the m39 better. Karelia in winter, days are short and nights are cold. You dont want a locked up bolt or to be fumbling around with unfamiliar controls in the dark. The extra time is worth it.
On another note; if I have a sidearm? I would consider leaving the rifles. 19 miles on skis will be a lot easier without the weight and bulk. If you have to confront a patrol you're probably fucked anyway lol.
Option 1, the m39 can fire the 7.62x54r so given 15 minutes grab 2 to 3 clips and bug out. You can scavenger ammo from soviet soldiers if you manage to kill any, but your main priority isn't even to fight it is escape and evade. You have one advantage already, your own skis, you have speed. Use it. The extra 10 to 15 minutes on skis can get you far.
The M39. The glint from the Kar98 would probably reveal my position. Also a full bandolier would slow me down. The Barrel too has a tendency to freeze up from what I remember.
I choose the way more accurate rifle that has way more rounds available in Finland at the time. The Finnish M 39 once the 98k 60 rounds are gone he will need to find a Moisen to match the ammo that will be every where.
Watching this the obvious choice would be the Maurer with its available ammo. But I suspect that if I found myself in this scenario I would go with the M39 that I was most familiar with.
I like the twist with the ammo situation. If I didn't have to spend time gathering ammo I'd grab the M39 since everyone is carrying ammo for it. But since the Mauser has ammo with it I'm grabbing that and getting out. Hopefully I can get away before I need to use it or if I run out of ammo I'll be able to grab a Mosin.
If I still had my wits about me after having been knocked unconscious ,in the sub zero snow of a Finish winter mind you, and witnessing the death of my squadmates (as I gathered their tags and papers) I'd see no reason to also not grab a Mosin and _some_ ammunition in the process or _just_ the Kar98. The reality is whichever is on hand first is what I am taking. No reason to fully replenish ammunition in this situation either. This academic exercise is a flight scenario and not a fight scenario. 19 miles to cover in the snow after what is perhaps the worst day of your life, with the enemy approaching behind you, is the real challenge that day.
This is a really interesting one. If I'm going to be skiing for hours, what's another 10 minutes to gather minimal ammo for the M39 when I will be avoiding engagement if possible during my escape. To me, that particular scope is more liability than asset, especially considering the conditions and I'd rather have the longer range irons than a crappy 1.5x scope if I absolutely had to take a shot.
Situation Evaluation: the task is to contact your own side rather than engage in combat so the weapon should be for personal defence, 30km is not far on skis, just a few hours travelling time however detours and time spent hiding must be expected. It will be necessary to identify enemies and friendlies out there as early as possible. Time is of the essence. Pros and cons: Option 1, it's familar, you've trained with it and know how to fix any malfunction, should you need more ammunition it's the most likely kind you'll find, it's also the battle proven rifle in those conditions. However time must be spent getting some ammunition. Option 2, it's loaded and there's a bandolier available, it has an optic that can be used to ID anyone you encounter. However it's unfamiliar and the ammunition you can grab now is all you'll have. I go for option 2, it's the most readily available and the optic is the clincher. I'd be tempted to remove the optic, dump the rifle, and rely on speed and stealth to get back to my own lines.
The scope on the K98 is inviting, but I'll go with the M39. As a trained Finnish soldier I'm used to shoot with iron sights, and having to sneak my way back to the friendly lines, I don't need to engage enemies far away. Having used both rifles, I'm more confident in the M39 action to not freeze up.
K98K for me. Reason 1: For all intents and purposes, the 8mm mauser and 7.62x54R possess comparable capabilities and limitations out to any realistic engagement range. Both weapons operate in essentially the same way, and have comparable stats regarding volume of fire. The key factor here for me is that ammunition is relatively more immediately available for the K98 in this scenario. No need to gather it from your dead buddies, thus saving you valuable time. The enemy is most likely already on their way back, after all. Reason 2: Operating alone on a 19 mile cross country ski trip back to the base, you're most likely going to need to rely on well placed, concise shots to get you home safely. You're not going to over power an enemy of superior numbers with an awesome volume of fire in some Hollywood style shoot out. The Z41 scope capitalizes on this reality by allowing you to make relatively more precise shots than you would probably be able to with the iron sights. the Reason 3: It is relatively well known that rimless cartridges (generally speaking) such as the 8mm Mauser, work better on stripper clips than rimmed cartridges like 54R and Finnish 53R. The Mauser ammo on stripper clips is more likely to give you a clean, smooth reload than the rimmed 54R or 53R cartridges on a stripper clip system. Reason 4: (Satirical) If you choose the M39, that Wermacht soldier is gonna be pissed when he finds out that he's not getting his sniper rifle back...
Time is of the essence, cut out 15 minutes by grabbing the Mauser. Your task is to report back pronto, so picking based on time not merrits of the weapon.
![🔴 Pick One Ep. 2 [Finnish Ski Patrol] 🔴 Ian McCollum (Forgotten Weapons) on the Winter War in WW2](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tPTfujk8wxI/mqdefault.jpg)
![🔴 Pick One Ep. 2 [Finnish Ski Patrol] 🔴 Ian McCollum (Forgotten Weapons) on the Winter War in WW2](/img/tr.png)
![MP5SD [GSG9’s "Silent Sniper" SMG] to 500yds: Practical Accuracy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xgV8ZByAF4s/mqdefault.jpg)
Im living in Finland and my most loved hobby is hunting chicken birds, sometimes using ski's. 30km are not far on ski's, especially if you move through your own area that you know very well. Here you can stay hidden in the thick forest while getting to where you need to, so with the right route selection enemy contact is a low threat. Using optics in this environment is a pain, no anti fog really works and after opening the lens covers you have a short window in which the optic is useful, so the zf is worthless. Also the Mauser loadout is heavy with all that ammo that you won't need. I take the mosin, because it will work in this environment better, take about 2 minutes to find around 10 rounds for it and bail. A sleak gun and good, tight sling is critical here, but I assume it is mounted on the mosin. Most russians had to move on foot at that time, so as long as I stay out of sight they should not be able to chase even they find my tracks. If they are on foot, the lighter I am the less chance they have to catch up. After skiing a few kilometers I would take a break and eat/drink as much as possible to fill up my energy and to get even lighter. The whole trip should not take longer than 3 hours.
Amen.
A very good answer to which I have to agree
Amen!
But time is ceitical
Very good answer. Swedish former arctic ranger here and I will also say that antifog is not fun and a good sling is important if going on skiis. Only one long sling will be a pain, so fixing it on the chest is better. But dual sling on the back is perfect unless the rifle is banging on your ass. 10 rounds and go.
Option 2. Save time by not having to scrounge for ammo. The most important thing is speed and avoiding detection by the enemy. While the Zf41 isn't great it could be used to spot and identify targets from further away than my naked eye. This could make avoiding enemy patrols and linking up with friendlies easier. My goal is to get back and avoid fights if possible.
It's only 1.5 powder with a very narrow field of view. Not much better than the naked eye. The real advantage is the simple post sight.
Problem with the Kar is that it does not have the proper sling attachments.
Good luck skiing with your off balance rifle.
@@mercifulephesian9359 Wouldn't the straight bolt of the m39 be nuisance while skiing getting jabbed into your bag? As well as having more potential of doing a nasty wound if you fell on top of it. I'm not sure since I've never carried the rifle slinged buy I'm curious never the lesss
@@shikuro
The m39 was designed for skiing.
The ski sling attachments allow the bolt to be parallel to your body so you don't come in contact with it.
Just look up pictures of Finnish Ski troopers and you will understand what I'm talking about.
@@mercifulephesian9359 Aa, thanks a lot just looked it up and yeah, also seen pictures where they sling it in front of their torso.
While I find the arguments about the loaded firearm and a head start being a better option, I think there are some arguments in favour of the M39 that should be noted.
- Being a Finnish soldier trained to move on skis would likely mean that you could move significantly faster than dismounted infantry over terrain that would not be accessible by armor or trucks - potentially somewhat negating the need to immediately get away quickly.
- Iron sights are preferable for snap engagements, which would be most likely in this scenario. Despite it's "scout" configuration, the scoped Kar98k is not preferable for chance encounters with patrols, and I doubt you would be settling into a firing position to take longer-range shots, for fear of disclosing your location. Additionally, the minimal magnification advantage of the Zf. 41 would only have a small benefit for scouting the way forward, assuming we don't also have issued binoculars on our person.
- I believe the M39 was set up with a sling amenable for skiing - as a former competitive XC skier, this would make a massive difference in terms of ensuring the rifle is cinched against the body and the weight is well distributed while skiing.
- Depending on the model, the Zf. 41 sight adjustment could seize up in cold weather - not that you would be making sight adjustments... you just have to hope that it's zeroed when you picked it up.
- A slung firearm with a scope is susceptible to being banged around on the body and losing zero while skiing. A firearm with iron sights is significantly less susceptible to this issue.
- Anyone who has carried/used a scoped rifle in the cold knows that scopes are susceptible to being packed with snow or frosting up.
Additionally, the argument that you would need to take more time to scavenge ammo seems moot, as you've already been looking around for ID tags and maps, but now I'm nitpicking.
You should watch the InRangeTV video on the ZF41.
Can't you just take the scope off if it becomes unusable? Even without the ZF-41 the Mauser is still a shorter, lighter gun with a more robust action.
I would imagine the ZF was set up pretty well for winter travel already but your observations are worth paying attention to for sure. As you know this is all about the travel. Good argument about the iron sights too, I tend to be more at home with them myself.
@@duginashley3199 perhaps, however I don't know if you'd want to be messing about with unscrewing the mount with cold hands in cold weather, especially not in a high-pressure situation.
@@borealranger9763 I can't imagine it would take any longer than gathering up spare reloads from all the bodies.
This video gets a like for the crossover of Forgotten Weapons and 9-Hole Reviews.
maybe because it is.....
Sponsored by Varusteleka
Most definitely.
The Mauser. On top of it being ready to go,the rifle was loaned in good faith to a fallen comrade,and should be returned in good faith.
I agree, with the Mauser choice, as you know the rifle is in good working order due to it being from a member of your unit.. My only concerns would be how long the rifle has been in the snow, and I am unsure if the optics were filled with nitrogen back then, so I don’t know if the glass would fog. I also don’t know how well the Mauser preforms when frozen vs the M39.
@@theman.1771 pretty sure you can still use your irons under the optic on those rifles
Amazing point! Got to keep your honor in war
its also a smidgen of proof of who you are to friendlies considering you have no coms to warn of your arival.
M39, it works always and it will be easier to find ammo for from the dead. And your training with long arms does not encompass optics use and the zed f was not a great scope in lower light conditions such as in heavy forest.
The M39 solely because you most likely will be more familiar with the platform. Waking up dazed and confused I would not want to use a platform I am less familiar with.
Also a good answer. The fact that as a finnish soldier you would already be familiar with the mosin means that it would more likely be a handicap to try and use a mauser with an unfamiliar german scope.
and M39 uses same soviet cartridges
You were searching the friendlies bodies already for docs & disks, you would of also gathered ammo, grenades, what ever else. M39.
Been scrolling and wondering when I'd see someone who was paying attention, lol.
Yep. First comment I agree with.
And You are probably used to it from training, You would not be able to utilise the benefit of the scope, maybe as a monoscope, but You would already have one if You are the squad leder, likwise with the the map. But as some one else said, should I bother with a rifle at all, maybe a handgun for close defense, not a rifle for long range offense, and in the finnish forests a scope for long range shooting? The line of sight may be max 250 to 300 yards often max 50 to 100 yards. If the enemy is seen, keep Your head down, if You run in to them, send some rounds with Your L35, and run/ski as if the Red Army is after You.
Agreed, if you'll looking for intell and ID (and wallets), you're going to find and pocket ammo. Use what you know, particularly since the Mosin is designed for these conditions.
@@dmg4415 Even if I have to leave bodies behind, the maps are coming with me. They're intell to the other side, and it should be secured and either taken with or destroyed. Ditto any thing the radio man had. If I'm not dead, I have to assume the enemy didn't check bodies, and I don't want to bank too hard on their lack of competence twice in a row.
Loaded rifle with rounds wins hands down, time is a wasting. So grab the Kar98k, ammo and get moving.
Having ammo ready without scavenging is good, but Kar98k's caliber is different than M39. And since Soviets' rifle uses the same cartridge as the M39, I'd risk it a bit and take that and ammo from one body. Also, as I wouldn't have a scope, I don't have to worry about scope glint. My answer, Kar98k is better on the short term, but M39 edges out in the long term.
Yeah. Unless we're Simo Haya with cheat codes enabled, you're alone so if any enemy force catches you then your chances are slim no matter what you have. At best (Or worst really, since your best chances lie in avoiding a fight in the first place) you'll be using your weapon to deter, deny or most likely just slow down pursuit, not trying to take down an entire enemy squad or platoon by yourself. You've already searched the bodies for tags and intel, so pick up the loaded, imperfect weapon and ski like your life depends on it. Because it does.
@@WilliamSanderson86 The mauser would not be difficult to learn how to operate
Being intimately familiar and capable with your bolt action weapon isn't going to mean much if 20+ soldiers/partisans catch you alone. Not unless you're incredibly talented, incredibly lucky, and in an incredibly good position, anyway. Under *any* other circumstances I'd agree and say the M39 all day every day, but under the specific conditions laid out here and being realistic... if you end up in a firefight with the pursuing force, you've probably made a fatal mistake.
@@WilliamSanderson86 You don't have to shoot a gun to get a feel for how it works, only how it shoots and kicks, also you can dry fire it
Option 1- As explained by my Grandfather who was part of the USARAL Ski program during the Cold war.
-Go with what you where trained with. If you are a Finnish soldier then you would be more familiar with the M39 rife.
(If it malfunctions, you know how to clear and clean it. You know its weight, its accuracy, and its quirks.)
-The M39 was designed to be slung while skiing.
(Baggage, especially when it's something you are unfamiliar with, is always going to be an annoying hassle when skiing. It can even go as far as injuring you.
Proper sling attachments are a must)
- Lastly you would have an approximate time for you being knocked out. Your radio man would have had a watch.
(I was a radio man, I had a standard issue watch. It would be difficult to do your job without one. But even without a watch you could not have been knocked out for more than a few minutes at most.
Any more than that and you would be suffering from a nasty concussion and you wouldn't be making it far.
If you only have ~19 miles to go then it will only take you around an hour and a half to get there on skis, give or take 20 minutes.
That's going 10-20 miles an hour in the Forrest, 30+ miles an hour if you get any downhill slopes.)
I would leave both guns at the site and ski as fast as possible because agains reinforcements my speed is the best defense. Also you can ski faster without rifle...
Option C is best option? I think maybe.
Then encounter an enemy patrol or squad and have to surrender
Hum, interesting. I think I take the rifle in case I have to fight, but I can defiantly see the argument to dich every bit of weight for speed.
I think the extra 10ish pounds is worth it
And skiing 30km can be done pretty fast anyways.
I am Australian and my skiing ability is best summed up by "I think the pointy bits go forward". I'm going to die either way so the rifle is academic! 😂
Congratulations mate. You are firmly on your way to be proper arctic trooper.
(Flashbacks of massive pileup of men during return trip from shooting range. Downhill and 200 guys don´t mix well.)
I actually think which rifle would you rather be buried with is an interesting question as well.
@James Healy: think of it this way: you got there on skiis, so you would have already learned to use them beforehand. And cross country skiing is far easier and faster to learn (in my personal experience) than downhill skiing.
M39 will not freeze in the cold. Optics can get iced and become unusable..
It's a Gebirgsjager rifle. I think German mountain troops would expect to be in the cold and have equipment usable in such conditions
And there are backup iron sights.
@@FieryCheeze The Germans found in 1941 winter that non of their equipment is usable in the extreme cold. K98 has tolerances that are to tight to function ok in extreme cold
Depends. Some M39's have pretty tight fitted bolts and can get certainly sticky. I know, I own an M39.
@@janialander414 So do I and I also have Yugo Mauser - same action as the K98. There is a difference....
gunfuddzius: the best gun is always a loaded one.
Guy didn't get any shots off though.... Did the Kar98 malfunction in the cold? 🤔
@@iii-ei5cv First man down in an ambush. The only thing that malfunctioned was his circulatory system.
@@iii-ei5cv k98 doesn’t do well in extreme weather because the tolerances are so tight especially in the cold
I yelled in excitement when you said Ian is joining us for this episode
It's awesome to see all these gun channels doing videos together. Thanks again yall
The most likely choice given to one in this situation would be neither.
Because the victorious partisans would have taken anything the could find and carry with them and destroyed what they could not carry.
If they for some reason had missed the two rifles, the ready to go 98 it is. My best chance for survival is getting the f..out. In any firefight I'm likely f...ed because I'm alone and they aren't.
M39. Finnish optimized for the climate. If I am taking time to collect dog tags and intell, I can grab ammo from my former squad.
You see, you always have choices. Yes, the partisans could come back.....but why? There's the question of why the Intel is still available.
The Mauser isn't reliable in Sub-Zero combat. The Russians found them with frozen bolts as they stripped the dead. This whole exercise is designed to make you consider Sub-Zero combat.
@@Plumpplumberbalding Old myth. It was a brief issue quickly solved with different gun oil.
@@Plumpplumberbalding that came from the German gun oil and I would assume any Germans serving with the Finn's have leaned that lession and if the radio guy loans a k98 from a German you better bet he is going to cycle the bolt and when it's frozen reoil it
Norwegian here, been on Skis since I was 2.
M39. It's empty, and I'll get the bandolier or 5 laying about in my newly found cemetery. Also, why would I take that long? It's cold as Satan, I'm hurrying up and getting the first couple of bandoliers, more than enough ammo for my purposes. The M39 is something I'm used to as a snow Santa, compared to the K98. The K98 optic might also snag, especially since I'm on skis. I want it to be as easy as possible to retrieve the rifle should I need it. Optic could also freeze, not dealing with it. If I had an extra set of binocs, that'd be best. It's going to take me a couple minutes to orient myself, find my skis, make sure the bindings are good, and set off. I'm going to do my best not to assault anyone and if I do, I'm one tired Finn on skis, I don't stand much of a chance against a group without my Suomi. Biathlon is difficult, and being on Skis while dealing with recoil, etc on a full-powered cartridge, yuck, doing my utmost to avoid that. I'm going to be focused on using my other senses and staying out of harm's way, carefully retreating while taking full advantage of my hopefully white snow PJ's.
Should the feces hit the Finnish speaking snow, I'm going to be primarily looking for movement, actively avoiding engagement. The scope is cool and whatnot, but the distances aren't so great that the scope is absolutely necessary. I'll be like Rokki and try to have a cozy trip back. Thank god I didn't have to carry the fucking Maxim gun.
Cool scenario.
The m39. As an former lieutenant in the FDF i must say that the m39 is better suited for the winter and of course a normal conscript isn't taught the use of an scope. The m39 also had a bigger trigger guard so the gun could be operate with thick gloves on that would aid in the soldier to not get frostbit in the freezing winters. The average range of an engagement is under 200 meters / 220 yards since most of the Finnish / soviet border is covered by thick pine forests so the scope of the kar98k is almost useless. The 15 minutes of gathering ammunition isn't a big deal since you have skis that you can escape much faster than the soviet troops since the soviets never issued skis to their soldiers. If the soviets dont kill you its going to be the cold. An average soldier was taught basic survival skills in the continuation war so they could survive a night in the freezing nights of the Finnish winters. a average soldier could ski around 6km/h while the soviets would have really hard time walking threw the over a meter of snow witch would bog down the soviets to a crawl, This was an actual tactic used by the Finns to quickly engage the soviets and then ski away. Happy to answer any questions.
Neither. A 19mile crosscountry ski trip is bad enough, trying to pack a full length rifle with ammunition is no bueno. With no support I sure as hell am not getting into a fire fight. I'm beating feet or hiding, not looking to engage the enemy. Returning alive with intel is priority.
But, if I absolutely have to pick, the K98k. Slightly shorter, quite a bit lighter, ammunition already on hand, useable optical sight (I'm near-sighted so ironsights alone are not ideal). Done and done.
You can't properly sling a Kar98k with skis. It does not have the Ski sling attachments.
You are better off taking the m39 and getting some ammo. Ski troopers where trained to go long distances with a light load. That being your rifle and ammo and some rations.
@@mercifulephesian9359 My great grandfather was one of those guys. I would take my training rifle rk62/76. And no. The long distance patrols behind enemy lines are not carrying light loads. 15 years ago when I did my service we skiid ~100km at the time of 22 hours give or take with full equipment. Thats about 25-30 kilograms of what you have in your backpack only + gun.
But if would have to choose it between the two of those it would be m39
@@gringostarr69
Okay. I have some issues with what you are saying. Maybe you can clear them up for me.
A standard infantry load in NATO forces is 40-63kilos (90-140lb). So 20-30kilos (40-65lb) is a light infantry load. Which goes with what I stated was the standard for Ski Troopers.
Next you are saying you skied 100 kilometers (62miles) in a 21-23 hour period.
That means your average speed was 5.3 kilometers an hour (3.3 mph) which is only slightly faster than the average rate for marching infantry at 4kilos an hour (2.5mph).
Granting you both with a standard rest of 10 minutes each hour for a total of ~3.6 hours of rest in a 22 hour period.
How was it that you where skiing so slowly?
@@mercifulephesian9359 a querilla patrol carries it's full gear + tent + stove and some other stuff like radio + batteries + mines and so on so that averages about 100 kilos divided with 9-10 people in cycles.
The skiing trip I was talking about was not skiing on a flat surface but with really high climbs that took about 30mins and while you got to skii on frozen lake your skiis would pile up with slush at the bottom of them every 5mins and you needed to clean them. Not really sure how much weight we had on board at that horrific occation, but I'm telling you. We had been training for a year and were concidered as an elite squad and that was the most toughest thing I had to go through in a day. Some of the guys were seeing frigerators skiing next to them at the end of the journey and they were professional athletes.
And like I said. It is 15 years ago. Don't really remember the exact weight of what we usually carried with us. We normally hid rations of days of food packages for to be collected later on. Water is the most essential one that you carry. You might be right that the weight wasnt right but im getting old (unlike the other 20 friend that were in our unit and had to learn morse code too), but I'm still thinking fondly of those times.
@@mercifulephesian9359 in case you wonder what kind of skiis we had: images.app.goo.gl/YXoz2e7NWgR4w1dw8
Seeing the K98 and having time of the essence take it and go. Having a full bandolier of ammo to have off the bat is really nice. I like the idea of having a ZF41 and trying to keep relative distance from any enemy. Also seeing how effective it is from the video InRange TV at engaging enemy’s at different distances quickly is a huge plus. Their performance with optic in that video showed how good the ZF-41 is at picking out targets and engaging quickly and accurately. For those reasons that’s my pick. Best option for keeping my distance and if a firefight breaks out I have the the plus of the ZF-41.
Wow. People *really* overestimate the value of very crude optics, and underestimate the value of a proper skiing sling.
@@Robert-cd5zr you'd need sling mounts in the right position too
The russians hear the snow speak finnish not german for a reason
Cuz It's Finland?
@Zoomer Waffen damn bro, if you actually stopped watching ww2 meme compilations and maybe just opened a wikipedia article you would know that the russian winter is what halted the germans. But go ahead and make fun of the american education system even though Im not even american lol
@@narodwpsanialy1940 Its a Simo Hayha meme
@Zoomer Waffen wish I cared what a nazi larper thinks but I don't.
Finnland got supplied by germany
As a Finn. The Mauser is better gun, but can freeze over. So depends if we're on Patrol in 1942 or 2020.
2020 Mauser, 1942 Mosin.
Nights coming. Likely weather too. Shelter, water and fire are probably more important.
If weathers on your side and it’s a full moon you can probably navigate safely someplace safer.
I honestly think the cold weather is going to be a bigger factor in operability. There were brutally cold temperatures in Finland at that time. Better to eat the time and have a rifle that works. M-39
My familiarity is with the mauser platform. I'm also rather fond of chargers that work well. It's lighter, and I need to move quickly. The time needed to grab ammo for the m39 is the real clincher in my opinion.
M39. If we are realistic about the training a Finnish soldier had in time period it would not have covered the K98 or the Zf.41. And as for the time advantage, you have to recover tags and sensitive documents anyway, ammo would not add much time to that chore. The Zf.41 is a finnicky and difficult to use optic, and for a Finnish regular, or me with years of optics use on firearms, the Zf.41 is a liability and even more so when you are trying to learn how to use it on the go, alone. Besides in the event of contact, the goal is to minimize interaction, not go on some Call of Duty power fantasy one man crusade.
Im grabbing the K-98 with ZF41 scope.
1) it's loaded & good to go.
2) having a DMR scope enables me to make the most of my limited ammo (slim chance of coming across anymore in the 30km back to friendly lines).
3) The K98 with ZF41 enables a better shot on target ratio (if you know what you're doing / how to employ it). If you're that far behind enemy lines you'll only want to be engaging the enemy on your terms (1-3 man groups max)....if at all. Engaging enemy groups any larger will likely bring about your hasty end, as they'll be able to fire & move on you / your position.
Only engage when absolutely necessary.
4) Should the scope go down, you've still got your standard Iron Sights to fall back on.
5) the 15 minutes head start it affords is equally valuable when on the run behind enemy lines.
6) without going out of your way...grab a pistol as a 2nd weapon if you come across one (it won't slow you down)...as you may need it if/when it gets to a close up fight...for the enemy...or ...
M39, grab it first and gather ammo whilst collecting the tags and Intel.
For me i would take the Finnish M39. I say I'm a decent shot with scopes but i love iron sights, lots of range time and hunting time behind firearms with no optics. List of other reasons
1. I know for sure ammo is available even if i have to salvage it
2. Even if i only find 20, 30 rounds I'll be fine since i personally would try my best to not engage in combat
3. Scopes can fog up
4. Who knows if the zero was knocked out of place or not. Rather not find out the hard way.
5. M39 is currently number one on my need to own list been hunting for one for a while now.
Go with what you are trained with 👍🏼
bro a bolt gun is a bolt gun is a bolt gun, the manual of arms for both is almost identical beyond the K98 being able to close on it's clips without breaking them, and it's loaded anyway, plus bruh, G L A S S
@@reesetompkins7987 so you are telling me that you would go against a platform that you familiar with and run another firearm that you may have no experience with at all? I get that a bolt gun is a “bolt gun” but what is that G L A S S zeroed at? Do you have a time to see your splash and correct it and get some dope...or run what you know 🤔
Folks, which rifle is designed for Sub-Zero operation? The Russians found a lot of German infantry dead with frozen bolts. I've lived in really cold weather before, and grease and oil glue up. The Russians cut their weapons lube with gasoline. Made it real thin, but worked. The Finns were even better at cold weather combat. That Mauser is like rat cheese.
If you've checked your dead for gear, you've already put ammo in your pouch. That Mauser is a fancy.
@@Plumpplumberbalding Except written right in the mission brief is "You will need an extra 10-15 minutes to gather ammunition form your perished squadmates.", along with "Time is of the essence" - why the ammo wasn't gathered earlier, guess we'll have to wait for the livestream to answer that.
@@weegaz22 I like your style señor 👍🏼
I don’t get it? Either rifle would be fine, but they are both kind or irrelevant in relation to the task at hand?
Exactly. This does not matter.
yup
Grab the mauser and scoot. If you get going quick enough, you hopefully won't need to shoot it. If you stick around looking for cartridges you run a much higher chance of seeing action, which is suicidal since you are alone. So the mauser for expediency. Speed is the mission objective(report the action) speed is life.
The M39 is very nice, but i life and breath vor 98k IRL, i trust my Life anytime on this Rifle. + Time is Key, so move up. If the Scope makes any Problem, i can rip it off and use Ironsights.
Option 1, I know the rifle will work in cold environment and is designed to be used with skiing. While the 10-15 minutes make take a bit, it's worth it in a firefight where i am using a more familiar weapon than the imported rifle. The m39 does have excellent iron sights and doesn't give away my position if I have to hide. The ammo quality it top notch compared the German substandard steel case. Overall, the m39 is a clear winner.
This content format, with interaction and shared knowledge, is superb. Congratulations for thinking outside the box 👍👍👍
I am so excited to see 9Hole Reviews with forgotten weapons making a video together, that means 1.30 hours of pure quality video not to mention the History background!!! Nice team up!!!
Hopefully longer😁
@@Andrew-dm8mk I bet you hope for more as every body I mean it is a prefect combination o knowledge!
@@ΣΑΒΒΑΣΚΟΚΤΣΙΔΗΣ I can’t wait 😁👍
Op 2. Its loaded, and you have plenty of spare ammo, meaning you can leave the combat zone quicker, and get out of the elements sooner, as well as possibly slip the noose if those partisans come back. The scope is also handy, letting you not only pick targets up at longer range but also disseminate friendlies from hostiles before a blue-on-blue.
The loaded Mauser.
1) The finnish soldiers showed how efficient they were with skis. The soviets will have a hard time to catch you
2) Taking the M39 means you hope to find dead bodies and take their ammo. But with the red army not that far, you don't want to waste your time searching ammo
3) A loaded mauser allows you to shoot an enemy to take his gun, but an empty M39 doesn't
4) Having billions of 7.62 x 54R is pointless because you don't want to fight the red army alone
Ski 39 miles?? Throw the rifle away. Too heavy!
Kilometers, about 19 miles
@@spookyindeed For a competent cross-country skier, that's not far.
The arguments for leaving both guns in favor of speed are compelling. I will take the K98 with the full bandoleer since it's ready to go.
Really enjoying this serie!
can we also get @varusteleka opinion on this as well? lol
Finnish m39 for sure
awesome content, defo my favorite channel of 2020.
I'm going to disagree with the hive mind here. I'm going to grab the Mosin and take a few minutes to scrounge some ammo from my fallen mates. I want the better cold weather performance that the Mosin provides. It shouldn't take long to find a few pouches of 7.62x54r. I wouldn't need much ammunition to sprint back to the Finnish lines. If I get caught in a firefight, I'm screwed anyway.
ETA: I've already gathered intelligence, maps, dog tags, etc. Why couldn't I have scrounged ammo too? I say I did, and so there isn't any time lost.
M39. Banging that scope around on your back isn't going to do the zero any favours. The M39 is a far superior rifle and can reach out much farther. Familiarity with the fire arm and terminal ballistics is going to be important as your going to want to engage a the longest distance possible so the enemy cover so you can keep moving. Ammo might be a problem but you going to want to stay away from engaging the enemy so don't need a whole pack full. Plus looking for ammo would give a opportunity to preclude a pistol with a mag or two and that could be a life saver if cqb takes place. I don't know what the K thinks of snow and ice compared to the Mosin but that could be a factor too. Anyway M39 thanks.
Finnish m39. Reason 1 if you make it back to finnish lines or what ever ammunition you run across in the process will be 54r. 2 I would rather have the report of my rifle sound like everyone else's in the area. 3 the scope on the mauser is pretty terrible. 4 you are now on your own, in a bad situation the time you take to gather ammunition should also be spent gathering whatever other supplies you can carry from the dead. 5 the m39 was designed to be skied with the mauser not so much, And the scope will fog in the cold.
I am an American of Norwegian descent, do nordic skiing, have hunted whitetails in knee deep snow in Michigan's upper peninsula for 50 years and am a former small bore competitor. I would choose the M39, primarily for dependability. I have both of those rifles in my house now and know their respective weaknesses and strengths. I can tell you that I have had a 98 freeze up due to the smallest drop of water drawn up by capillary action between the striker and the bolt shroud, then freezing. Hunting, drawing down on a deer and taking the second stage of a trigger out and having nothing happen is a very bad feeling. In a conflict it would be the last feeling that you would have.
M39 even though I have to gather some ammo. Reason- reliability of sight system in snow, falling, blowing etc, scope can have issues with snow, needing cleaning etc etc. open sights will not fail quicker target acquisition
K98k, Reasoning being theres a full bandolier of ammo, and that extra 15 mins gives me a head start over whatever hunter force is possibly coming behind me, my intention is to not get bogged down by fighting and keep moving to cover as much ground as possible so the rifle is only there for a last ditch "shit hit the fan/do or die" scenario, you also get a bit of extra little help with regards to seeing further up in front of you with the small amount of magnification the Zf41 offers to help me avoid anyone i dont want to be bumped by and spot friendles that i do.
In all honesty, the rifle is more about having a teddybear then an anything else. I would just pick the Kar 98 because it is convenient. In reality I would be trying to avoid a fight and just trying to move as undetected and as fast as possible. Possibly it would even be better to just leave both rifles behind and move that much faster, however, you can at least deal with a man or two if absolutely forced into a fight.
Still own 2 SKY M39. Both Sako. Owned original Kar98k with Zf41. Still own other 98ks. Grab the K98k and get moving. M39 is much heavier. Time to bug now and fast. The bad guys will be back soon and following your ski traces like wolves.
The name of the game here is evasion. Ideally you won't fire the rifle once on your way back, and any slight advantage you can get to aid in that goal is worth having. A rifle with a scope would be valuable for identifying things at a distance. If the worst were to happen and you were forced to engage, being able to pick priority targets would be far more valuable than being able to take more shots at indistinct man shaped blobs. The goal is not a body count but the ability to hobble your pursuers at a range where they are less capable of retaliation. And, as many have pointed out, the k98 is loaded, allowing you to fill that unforgiven minute with 60 seconds worth of distance run. Though Honsetly, in that precise situation, I'd take the scope off the rifle and ski for safety with as light a load as possible.
Mauser. optic will give you some enhanced range when clearing your path ahead as you make your way and there is ammo readily available. Optics will also give an advantage when discerning what's what, say in a treeline across a large open area and you are gonna want every possible advantage to making a rapid hit if you do get into an encounter as a solo person. The Mauser is also slightly shorter so when going through brush, less length to hang up on stuff. The turn down bolt handle is arguably better with more leverage than a straight bolt handle and would sling across your back more comfortably whilst skiing, but that is a dubious argument over one or the other. Disadvantages are possibly knocking the zero off if you take a spill, but you can readily remove the scope and go back to irons.
M39, why?
1. It's your daily Finnish rifles, at least you will familiar a bit, and it's already tuned for Finnish climate area
2. Your mission is to survive, not to kill, a reflection from a scope can be dangerous
3. While you searching for ammo, you could also pick some dog tags too
M39 if I feel that time can be spared. If I'm going around to collect tags, I figure grabbing loose clips shouldn't be much more an ask. If I feel too pressed for time that I don't want to even collect tags, 98k. I am biased toward the M39 as I own and regularly shoot one. The sights are fantastic and the Finn modifications to the Mosin receivers do tend to make the M39s run well. The minor magnification from the German optic I don't think even worth considering. Best case for magnification is that you find a pair of binoculars while collecting tags. Also, if the Finn WW2 loads are like the recreated handloads, the ammo is also great for precision shooting.
I would take the car 98k with optic and ammunition and 15 minute Head start realistically if I get into an engagement I'm probably gone anyway if it's any more than a few enemy combatants and I doubt I'd be able to burn through all the ammunition that bandolier is carried before I am either killed or I kill them and if I need more ammunition I can always switch back over to the enemy's weapons and ammo if needed though i think avoiding engagement is Paramount at this point
Can't wait for the live stream!
Speed may not be the right approach. If you are behind enemy lines, presumably, you will have to cross a guarded position at some point. A direct confrontation wouldn't work, so you will have to sneak by. Snow trails are easy to track and difficult to obscure. Retrace your patrol's tracks to find a relatively safe position away from the ambush, wait for a snowstorm, then race toward friendly lines while your tracks are covered. Success will likely depend on the weather, so pick the gun best suited for the weather you hope for - m39
I'm liking this new version of 'Who Wants to Be a Millionaire'.
The Mauser. In that scenario, I'm not looking for conflict. The ammo is all right there in the bandolier, which allows me to get moving quicker.
Kar98k with a full bandoleer of ammo. Ski as if the devil is closing.
Great video concept
I’ll have to go with the K98k and put as much distance between myself and the enemy as possible. Since I’d be alone I’m pretty sure if they catch up to me I’m toast regardless of weapon I have.
I agree 100%
Kar does not have Ski sling attachments.
Kar98 as it is ready and In Good Faith. Also an optic to scan ahead is a nice tool to have and the longh eye relief optic keeps you more aware of your environment similar to iron sights. Binoculars are better but a scope vs nothing is also better.
M39 all day, that low power scope is of very little use when the idea is to E&E and hopefully make it to friendly lines, the rifle has a somewhat better reputation for working in extreme cold, and your commanders in the rear will probably be less unhappy with you for losing the weapon you were issued if you bring back one of your homeland's weapons rather than pick up a novelty enemy weapon along the way. Do grab the K98 bolt and stomp on the scope before you leave though.
As a former Swedish army ranger, i would chose the Kar 98 K. You have the ammo now, and also the scope will help you to spot targets. The Mauser action is smoother and the trigger is crisper as well. Stripper clips will help you reload faster as well.
I’m taking the M39. That’s probably a far more common cartridge in that area/time.
If I trusted the proper Arctic maintenance of the 98k, I were familiar with how to clear the typical malfunctions it had, and the glass were unscathed, I'd take that.
Going body to body to retrieve ammo from fallen cohorts in what looked like 12 to 18 inches of powder would take a fair amount of energy and probably expose my fingers to more cold than I'd prefer. That leaves more energy for the ski back to safety, more time, and less time searching bodies to possibly rattle me. Additionally, the scope would give me an opportunity to glass the surroundings during the one or two planned water and snack breaks I'd likely try to take (if I didn't have any binoculars for that already).
The ability to possibly distinguish targets a little better is nice, but the better part of it all is the lower energy cost to me. Even with a pair of ski's, collecting ammo would be a lot of work.
M39. It was designed with this climate in mind. The optics of the day were more crude, prone to fogging and not as robust as iron sights. Also, if you are already taking the time to retrieve intel and I’d discs, time needed to grab extra ammo off the dead isn’t going to take that long and the common caliber can be easily resupplied if needed.
Kar89 you need to move quickly plus more observations with scope that my pick loved the last pick one livestream keep up the great content stay safe stay well to you and yours all the best from Scotland 🏴
Kar98 with the optic. 1. the optic is a potential force multiplier even if it is removed and just used as a telescope. 2. there is an easier time gathering the ammunition and time is of the essence and resupply is unlikely. Ideally it'd be best just to book it as fast and lightly as possible on the skis so the addition of either rifle adds to weight but since we have to choose we choose the fasts loaded option.
I live in Alaska and do both xc and tele. 30km would be about 3 hours on a track to possibly 6 hours if breaking trail off track through the woods. Figure the enemy would be at least 2 hours away with carrying wounded. I would take the M39 (better sling, lighter weight, weapon I had trained with), and source 10 rounds of ammo. I would also strip the bolts from any rifles and ditch them, pull dog tags and any other compromising information. Take 2 liters of water and some bread. Drink 1 liter and start skiing: skate the first 20 minutes than kick-n-glide for 40. Stop at an hour, take a pee, drink 1/2 the water, eat half the bread. Repeat. E&E at this point.
The scout style scope is actually a great advantage in the cold since it doesn't fog up in the cold, that's why the norwegian army used them for so long.
So for that and other reasons, the Mauser, clearly.
Because the first option was our Army issue I quickly pop some pervitin which allows me to gather the required items for the task and ski 250km in record time.
The kar98k, not only do you not have to search for ammo but you get a superior sighting system on top making it easier to both ID patrols (assuming you have no binoculars) and decide to engage or avoid as well as making it easier to make corrections. Even if the sight zf41 would go foggy due to the weather you could always simply detach it from the rifle and use the k98 with iron sights without the disadvantage of scope glint giving away your position. Yes resupply would be harder but I doubt you'd want to take many engagements as a lone man and rather just right out avoid combat and I'm assuming the bandolier would have 100 to 50 rounds worth of ammo. The only other huge problem with sight is zeroing is a pain in the ass but if we are assuming it's factory zero then it shouldn't be a factor and again you can just ditch the sight if you have to
M39 all day and 3 times on Sunday.
I would rather the m39 as well, but what of the time difference since the Russians are on their way? Neither rifle will save you if they catch up.
@@sinisterthoughts2896 ask the Russians how the M39 faired during the winter war.
@@stevelavalette6898 no need. The M39 wasn't fielded until the Continuation War. The Winter War was primarily M28, M28/30 (awesome rifle), M91, M91/24, and Suomi M31.
@@stevelavalette6898 so you are going to ignore the fact I agreed the m39 is a fantastic rifle, and ignore the point I made that the entire scenario revolves around the fact that you are being pursued and time is of the essence. Which means you ignored my entire statement to post a smug response. Good job looking like a stuck up jack ass. Good luck taking on an entire platoon of soviet troops with one, admittedly good 5 shot bolt action rifle, while 30 kilometers from any chance of help.
As an owner of a Sako M39 I would easily say I would take that. The ammo supply problem would be significantly alleviated due to shared ammo with the Soviets. I also know I can change my sling to work well with skiing. The scope on on K98K is nice but doesn't do it for me enough to make me change my mind. 1.5x zoom really isn't that much and I would rather scrounge around for someone's binoculars or something instead. Also I would avoid firing any shots unless absolutely necessary and that would most likely mean one range where the M39 iron sights are fine. My first and last priority would be to get back to my lines as quickly quickly safely as possible. I'm not there to make a one man last stand I'm trying to return to my unit
Option 2. Since your primary carry weapon was an SMG time on system isn't a factor unless you assume they used the M39 in basic. Time is a critical factor and a loaded rifle with ammo will spare you having to search for ammo when the enemy could return at any moment. The goal here is to move and get back to friendly forces, not fight or hold off the enemy. My only concern is using the Kar98 while on skies. I have no experience with that type of situation and not sure how difficult using a scope would be while skiing.
The limitations on auxiliary gear in WW2 would lean me towards taking the 98k just for the optic. If I can see half a mile more clearly, I can move faster on the snow and avoid any sov patrols. If I take the entire bandoleer and the rifle there is less evidence that someone survived. Give the suomi to the ghost on the ground and save some time scrounging. If enemy reinforcements are 3 miles out, I have about 30 minutes before someone gets to the ambush site. If I plant the suomi and yank the 98k and leave right away, I get 30 minutes of travel, on top of leaving fewer traces behind, on top of having some vision magnification. I have 19 miles, getting into a gunfight is not an option for the objective. 19 miles on skis is about 6 hours of travel, plus breaks, figure about 10+ hours until I reach friendly territory. My probability for survival gets to zero if I get into a gunfight. I could toss the bandoleer into a creek, saving a pocketful of rounds.
Focus on get going. Grab the Mauser and start to ski back. The key would be to get going as quickly as possible. 🙂
*Ian shows up*
me, subconsciously and under my breath: Gun Jesus
Walking in tourskis is quite slow, if have done it a few times. So I would take the Mauser, because if I got in to an engagement, I would like to keep the longest distance to the enemy. So the scope is the most important factor for me
ਵੀਰੇ ਮਾਉਜ਼ਰ ਦੀ ਬਣਾਈ ਗਈ ਕਾਰ 98 ਕੇ 1100 ਜ਼ਾਰਡ ਆਲੀ ਕਾਰਵਾਈਨਂ ਆਪਾਂ ਸਭ ਤੋਂ ਵਧੀਆ ਲੱਗੀ ਜੀ ਇਸ ਵੀਡੀਓ ਲਈ ਧੰਨਵਾਦ।
I'd grab the K98 , but I'd also spend as little time possible trying to find some ammunition for the M39 , it's what I'm familiar with and wouldn't need to worry about learning the ergos of the K98 . I'd hope that my knowledge of the area and skill of skiing would give an advantage of speed to make up for the time spent searching for ammunition for the M39
I would slightly favor option 1:
A) Cold. Both rifles have been sitting in the snow for potentially hours, mauser bolt could seize up. Also You don't know if the scope will lose zero or fog up.
B) Familiarity, bolt guns are all pretty similar but you still probably know the m39 better.
Karelia in winter, days are short and nights are cold. You dont want a locked up bolt or to be fumbling around with unfamiliar controls in the dark. The extra time is worth it.
On another note; if I have a sidearm? I would consider leaving the rifles. 19 miles on skis will be a lot easier without the weight and bulk. If you have to confront a patrol you're probably fucked anyway lol.
Option 1, the m39 can fire the 7.62x54r so given 15 minutes grab 2 to 3 clips and bug out. You can scavenger ammo from soviet soldiers if you manage to kill any, but your main priority isn't even to fight it is escape and evade. You have one advantage already, your own skis, you have speed. Use it. The extra 10 to 15 minutes on skis can get you far.
The M39. The glint from the Kar98 would probably reveal my position. Also a full bandolier would slow me down. The Barrel too has a tendency to freeze up from what I remember.
I choose the way more accurate rifle that has way more rounds available in Finland at the time. The Finnish M 39 once the 98k 60 rounds are gone he will need to find a Moisen to match the ammo that will be every where.
For the 2-3 hours he needs to ski the 30km back to his people? How much ammo would you need for 2 hours of fast movement?
Watching this the obvious choice would be the Maurer with its available ammo. But I suspect that if I found myself in this scenario I would go with the M39 that I was most familiar with.
Familiarity would be a huge factor here, no doubt. Tough choice given the scenario and time constraints.
I like the twist with the ammo situation. If I didn't have to spend time gathering ammo I'd grab the M39 since everyone is carrying ammo for it. But since the Mauser has ammo with it I'm grabbing that and getting out. Hopefully I can get away before I need to use it or if I run out of ammo I'll be able to grab a Mosin.
If I still had my wits about me after having been knocked unconscious ,in the sub zero snow of a Finish winter mind you, and witnessing the death of my squadmates (as I gathered their tags and papers) I'd see no reason to also not grab a Mosin and _some_ ammunition in the process or _just_ the Kar98. The reality is whichever is on hand first is what I am taking. No reason to fully replenish ammunition in this situation either. This academic exercise is a flight scenario and not a fight scenario. 19 miles to cover in the snow after what is perhaps the worst day of your life, with the enemy approaching behind you, is the real challenge that day.
This is a really interesting one. If I'm going to be skiing for hours, what's another 10 minutes to gather minimal ammo for the M39 when I will be avoiding engagement if possible during my escape. To me, that particular scope is more liability than asset, especially considering the conditions and I'd rather have the longer range irons than a crappy 1.5x scope if I absolutely had to take a shot.
Kar n ammo now, because time is of the essence, ten minute, depending on terrain, could be 2km. Good video.
Situation Evaluation: the task is to contact your own side rather than engage in combat so the weapon should be for personal defence, 30km is not far on skis, just a few hours travelling time however detours and time spent hiding must be expected. It will be necessary to identify enemies and friendlies out there as early as possible. Time is of the essence.
Pros and cons:
Option 1, it's familar, you've trained with it and know how to fix any malfunction, should you need more ammunition it's the most likely kind you'll find, it's also the battle proven rifle in those conditions. However time must be spent getting some ammunition.
Option 2, it's loaded and there's a bandolier available, it has an optic that can be used to ID anyone you encounter. However it's unfamiliar and the ammunition you can grab now is all you'll have.
I go for option 2, it's the most readily available and the optic is the clincher. I'd be tempted to remove the optic, dump the rifle, and rely on speed and stealth to get back to my own lines.
The scope on the K98 is inviting, but I'll go with the M39. As a trained Finnish soldier I'm used to shoot with iron sights, and having to sneak my way back to the friendly lines, I don't need to engage enemies far away. Having used both rifles, I'm more confident in the M39 action to not freeze up.
K98K for me.
Reason 1: For all intents and purposes, the 8mm mauser and 7.62x54R possess comparable capabilities and limitations out to any realistic engagement range. Both weapons operate in essentially the same way, and have comparable stats regarding volume of fire. The key factor here for me is that ammunition is relatively more immediately available for the K98 in this scenario. No need to gather it from your dead buddies, thus saving you valuable time. The enemy is most likely already on their way back, after all.
Reason 2: Operating alone on a 19 mile cross country ski trip back to the base, you're most likely going to need to rely on well placed, concise shots to get you home safely. You're not going to over power an enemy of superior numbers with an awesome volume of fire in some Hollywood style shoot out. The Z41 scope capitalizes on this reality by allowing you to make relatively more precise shots than you would probably be able to with the iron sights.
the
Reason 3: It is relatively well known that rimless cartridges (generally speaking) such as the 8mm Mauser, work better on stripper clips than rimmed cartridges like 54R and Finnish 53R. The Mauser ammo on stripper clips is more likely to give you a clean, smooth reload than the rimmed 54R or 53R cartridges on a stripper clip system.
Reason 4: (Satirical) If you choose the M39, that Wermacht soldier is gonna be pissed when he finds out that he's not getting his sniper rifle back...
Time is of the essence, cut out 15 minutes by grabbing the Mauser. Your task is to report back pronto, so picking based on time not merrits of the weapon.