I've got a 1942 M91/30 with replica PU scope. Fantastic rifle. Also a 1942 RC Kar98k w/ irons. Pretty much all mis-matched but functions great and is very accurate as well. Both strong designs, and would trust either of them. My favorite bolt action of WWII would have to be either SMLE or No.4 though. That slippery-smooth bolt, 10-rnd mag, and easy to use clips are quite advantageous in a world where bolt actions are still very prominent. Quite accurate too. I just love historic firearms lol
The 700 action is a modified mauser action, the most obvious difference is the fact that it is a push feed in contrast to the mausers control feed. Push feed rifles became more common in the post war period as they were cheaper and easier to manufacture, and did not need as tight tollerances for it to funtion.
cont'd-- version either for the same reasons. "It'll collapse if we invade! It'll collapse if we take their industrial regions! It'll collapse if we take Moscow!" It was just an extremely strong state; the Nazis could not have overcome it even if Hitler had listened more to his generals. And if he had, he probably wouldn't have invaded the Soviet Union because they knew they could not win against them in a fair fight.
I remember seeing a video demonstration of an M1 Garand being topped up with individual rounds. It looked hard and was admitted to be cumbersome. The video also demonstrated how to eject a half spent clip. Neither of these were recommended for combat as it was too prone to failure but was apparently useful for maintenance in a non combat environment.
i have a nagant and a mauser. I would trust the mauser with my life not the nagant. the nagant is sluggish and tends to jam. The reason russia won was because they had 30 russians to one german.
Russian soldiers were in fact outnumbered in the beginning of the war. They took on more casualties overall, since those first armies of theirs were wiped out by the Germans and had to be quickly replaced.
I love both these rifles for different reasons. The Mosin is so cheap(picked up my second for $99 four days ago!) and so fun to shoot. It's so rugged and tough and you have to respect the simple yet bulletproof design. The mauser though, is just a work of art. I love the "click" when you pull the bolt up or push it down and it's bolt was revolutionary. Both are just awesome rifles, you have to respect them both.
@bleushift What happens if the zero gets thrown off during battle ? Or he needs to zero for a further distance ? With the K98 you have to F around with a tool with bullets going over your head. The 91/30 you just turn the knobs a bit with your hand. Simple as that
@ethanreipold88 mostly the bolt head to sand down make sure you clean it REALLY good after doing so because it seems after i did there were some shavings left and made it more of a gritty action but doing this might help it but ok cya
@SashaVedernikov Okay sounds fair, but which one had better lens quality? The Germans were well known for making excellent quality lenses. My high school had two pre-WWII German light microscopes that beat the modern ones by miles.
@MrLolx2u In that era, you zeroed a scope at the range, and left it alone. From the range, you took it out to war and compensated by holdover IF NECESSARY- sniping in those days was done at considerably closer ranges and fooling with knobs was unnecessary. Both rifles would have been zeroed at a range, then left alone. Ability to zero a rifle in combat is completely irrelevant because you wouldnt have time to zero it properly, no matter how easy it was. You'd just compensate by holdover.
I've got a 1937 Tula Mosin Nagant 91/30. It's beat to hell with gouges all over the frame, scrapes and scratches on the receiver and butt-plate; very much a rifle that saw alot of action, but the action of the trigger and bolt is smooth, never jams, and the bullet goes exactly where I want. K98's are surely one of the most influential and proven rifles of all time, but my Mosin was designed to be reliable, simple, and crude enough to crack a few skulls with it's buttplate. I need nothing more.
@SashaVedernikov When I read PinteofShite's comment I believe he was referring to the problems of zeroing the scope not adjusting for range and windage. I am sure you are aware that they are separate things. A scope that required a special tool for something that required a rapid adjustment would not have lasted very long in a battle situation. Incidentally, none of the books I have, including Peglar's, mentions anything about the Zeiss requiring a tool for range adjustment.
@SashaVedernikov And if you're wondering...I actually own a Chinese Type 53, which is a clone of the M44 after Russia came out with the SKS and decided selling some tooling to the Chinese. Some consider these hit-or-miss rifles which is true because some used Soviet spare parts (like mine), but the quality control was higher because they weren't wartime guns. Mosins get a bad rap simply because the wartime infantry guns were cranked out fast with low inspection standards for volume.
@ethanreipold88 and you can't single load a kar98k because the claw extractor won't fit around the rim you have to have a cartridge in the magazine to have the claw actually grab onto it unlike the mosin were it's push fed and you don't need to
@jakethewhale it's a 3.5 variable zoom they were most likely sighted at 3 400 yards now what if you lose you're zero which is HIGHLY common because it was banged around and someone is at 800 yards ?
okay, I have a Tula Mosin Nagant 91/30 made in 1934 (standard infantry rifle, not a sniper). at 100 yards it is dead on when I use Brown Bear 178 grain ammo. I recently bought a tin can of 440 rounds Soviet Surplus from the 1980's. it is 147grain. At 100 yards, it shoots considerably low and to the left. my question is, what was the typical bullet grain load for a typical soviet infantryman with a mosin nagant. Because I am thinking this 1980s stuff was meant for a different weapon like PKM.
@SashaVedernikov Stalingrad was a large city, and after it was bombed it provided the snipers with perfect environment. But what I don't understand is this: Were the snipers at Stalingrad, both russian and german, taking a number of shots at their enemies to zero in the scope, and only after that were they actually killing? Or is it that they chose their hunting grounds, and then they had land marks for ranges, making easier to estimate the range to target?
A simple field strip and clean is pretty darn fast and easy with any military bolt action (at least any one I've owned). Granted the bolt design on the Mauser is more complicated, you don't need to strip a bolt for a field clean.
Cool video. My only gripe is that comparing 2 rifles only by the amt of shots necessary to zero it is not a fair comparison. A sniper does not zero-in their rifle during the battle, it should already be zeroed. A better comparison would be accuracy, range, etc.
It was exceptionally rugged, the high rate of fire was useful, and we know participants in the war loved it because both sides loved to use them - they were very popular among German soldiers who could acquire them. The MP-40 was primarily designed with war production in mind; it was cheap and not that reliable, and I'd argue that its rate of fire was too low. Stop getting your facts from Call of Duty.
@SashaVedernikov I think you are confusing how the Zeiss scope on the Mauser was zeroed and how it was adjusted for range. It did not require a screwdriver to adjust for range as that was done easily by turning the appropriate drum. The problem for the German snipers was that the scope would easily go out of zero. All it took was for the rifle to receive a hard bump and it would require re-zeroing. This required the screwdriver and time, something that was not available in Stalingrad.
There is something to be said for scopes that require tools - they are very inconvenient to adjust, but keep their zero well. You can set your zero and keep it there and it won't get bumped when you are crawling around. At the fun gun range I want something easy to adjust, in battle I want something that holds zero if bumped and is hard to adjust. These guys are at the gun range, not crawling around in battle.
I grew up on a farm in Kentucky and was shooting a .22 Marlin at 6, under my Father's supervision, of course. I could outshoot him by 7, and by 12 he'd let me shoot as often as I wanted, as long as I didn't take my younger brothers with me. I would have "shoot-offs" with another friend, and we became exceptionally accurate. Shot later at summer camps and on military prep school team. Made qualifying Expert on the M16 very easy! I was a Navy Officer, so being a sniper was not possible.
I think it's a good comparison which would be easier to adjust the scope on in the field, though. That'd be a significant advantage in a city-scape where the range of targets could vary considerably.
@ethanreipold88 not with a control fed rifle the claw extractor it won't catch the rim when in the chamber like i said the only advantage to is is if you plan to use it for DG and not everyone is interested in that
Germans did also attach Russian scopes sometimes, instead of capturing a rifle, and having an ammonition problem. But that was rare or else more common during the later parts of the war.
@goatmurray Doesn't matte rin the past or now, if a sniper takes a longer time to zero his rifle using a stupid tool while facing another sniper or just a normal infantry, your life is in danger cause hand twist saved roughly 1/3 of a sec rather than searching for tools and screw the scopes till it zeroed and may i ask? In the dark, no matter what sniper you used and you needed to zero you scope and you can't even see you god damn hands, would you rather use a hand twisted or tool zeroed scope?
Aren't those the Tigrs though? Anyway, just got an ex-sniper that I'm going to convert back. Bore and rifling looks good, crown is good too. Haven't shot it yet, I'll have to check it out.
I'm currently in the process of purchasing my very first rifle in Australia, I have a choice of either a refurbished Mosin-Nagant M91/30 for $450 or an unissued, perfect condition Portuguese contract Mauser K98 for $2850. The K98 is absolutely beautiful, it's shipment was lost on the way to Germany and thus it stayed in storage in pristine condition for over 70 years. The Mosin is rugged and not nearly as attractive as the Mauser, but I still admire the weapon. I'm not sure what to go with.
@goatmurray and besides spotters would not tell them to adjust there sights (example: one click left 2 clicks up) if it was completely useless and no need to do so i know now they use Kentucky windage more than actual adjustments but it's still very important to adjust your sights
@SashaVedernikov Actaully, they were snipers, and they didnt have a rush to shoot, but to make that clear instant kill shot. That's why the German KAR98 had an advantage having it to be screw just because it wouldnt hit any thing and misscorrecly change the crosshair position
@SashaVedernikov If the tool is required to adjust for range, then the german scope is not sniper friendly. It also forces a sniper to take his weapon away from it's target.
Almost like the Boer Wars, the Boers relied heavily on their guns for food to survive, one war broke out the English very quickly discovered that their enemy are very well concealed and very very good shots For example one battle british killed were 1200 where the boers lost only 8
But just the fact that with each pull of the trigger, the cylinder has to force itself forward to make a seal with the barrel makes for a strong trigger pull. I think you'll only be able to get it so light.
Both a fairly similar ballistics wise, the 7.62x54 tends to drop a bit quicker then the 7.92x57 but is very close in performance. Plus i think you may be thinking in videogame terms.
The only plus I can see the Nagant pistol having is the ability to have a suppressor attached to it. Other than that, the way it's loaded, shot, and the heavy trigger pull would make it rather difficult to use in a fight. That's just what I gather, however. I never shot it before. Just studied lightly on it.
@SashaVedernikov It does whether or not it's significant to your use/specifications. The fact is that one side of the scope has more field of view to the side of the crosshairs than the other which isn't an optimal arrangement. As for the PU scopes being perfectly aligned I'm figuring most were dead on, PU Tula snipers were all hand-picked gems whereas the average Mauser sniper was little more than a standard infantry gun. Fact: Russians used Zeiss scopes then switched to PU due to price.
Okay so the Soviet scope is easier to zero, but which scope keeps its zero longer? Also, you're supposed to shot three round groups to eliminate other factors like ammunition lol.
@ethanreipold88 but hell at most you can just do work with it like i did with mine i just sanded down my bolt cleaned it and sanded down the stock and it helps
It seems the Germans scope was trying to offer accuracy beyond what was actually needed, and in the process traded in practicality. Soviets were also did quite well in close combat, with an abundance of PPSh-41 sub-machine guns, greater number than German MP38/40, and arguably more deadly with 71 rounds at 900rpm. For example, lots of PPSh-41 were used in German service (converted to 9x19mm) but very few MP38/40 were used by the Soviets.
@SashaVedernikov I agree that the russian system is easier to use. But I was curious how would that help when you have to shoot more then 1 shot to land 1 hit. How would they know to dial in 500 yards and not 450 yards or 550 yards. I think that snipers, german and russian, would chose where to shoot, and that allows them to zero in a certain range. Can any one give a combat range for Stalingrad? 500 yards seems a very long range in city combat, close to nonexistent.
@MrDip02 It'll easily reach to 1000 yards. It's extremely popular in 1000-yard F-class competition. It just doesnt reach that far often. An extra 400 yards isnt unfathomable, it just lacks energy at that range.
@nyctasiaselesq believe it or not, snipers are very good at estimating ranges. (today they don't have to, they have a laser range finder, but they still are trained to do it old school) Snipers use natural landmarks as markers. Often they will scout the area out first and make it their hunting ground. They don't necessarily sneak into an area and start shooting. They fight defensively in nature because they have to, they are outnumbered so they rely on being unseen and knowing the land better.
@SashaVedernikov I'd have to disagree with the 1903 being the best overall, at least in terms of potential beyond their stock unit. Granted it had a long service record...but one of the problems in terms of comparing it is which variant you would use from 1903 to the early 70's, and Germans did put captured scopes on K98's, which had the best BC slug of the time. Now when it comes to which makes the best rifle to modify into a perfect rifle, I'd have to go with the Mauser hands down.
However, I must say that the Mosin is a great rifle. Extremely accurate if original and correct. Another thing about this video, one of the commentators makes reference to the fact that there was a Russian pre-war rifle culture that aided in providing experienced marksmen for the war effort. Hell, the same can be said for the Germans. German shooting clubs and shooting competitions are legendary. Neither side lacked well trained marksmen.
This is fairly interesting, though I'd much rather have the K98. My 1942 Izhevsk 91/30 is an absolute pig of a rifle, I'd sooner burn it for firewood rather than try and fight with it. I've done every trick in the book to make it smoother and more reliable, but it remains a Jam-0-Matic! Weren't the PU scopes a hasty copy of a Zeiss? I know the earlier PEMs were.
@SashaVedernikov: Well actually Zeiss scopes are still one the clearest and most expensive scopes on the market up until this day. A lot of hunters used these scopes all around the world.
M39 is also a great rifle. Its sights in my opinion are perfect and its easier to aim with it. However its bolt action can be little stiff and needs time to get used to it. It also kicks like a horse no matter what bullets you use. Its very hard to make a choice with these two. I love both guns, but maybe k98 a little more.
but the kar98 is more powerful than the mosin nagant in terms of damage, isn't it? I'm not too sure though, well anyways, tell me what you know or think.
you're right. but there a quite a few Germans with 200+ kills. Many German kills where over greater distances.Hetzenhauer made a confirmed kill at 1100 mtrs. Not bad at all. Both are effective rifles, but me personally, I would go for the K98K (or a Lee Enfield Mk1 no 4) and yes I have all 3 of these rifles and shoot them.
@jakethewhale also this video is just showing how easy it is to sight in your scopes since you don't need to use your tools the glass on your rifle will help your accuracy FAR more than people think the better the glass the better that accuracy in which the ziess did not seem to do the at most best at also it was more of an eye sore
While it is easier to zero (without tools) it is also easier to knock out of zero just by bumping those turrets up against things. And in combat, that is a very real concern.
@1169Timothy yeah no it's only best in certain situations like you said they would not be zeroing it in combat situations but it's just best when you need to quickly it's there for you
The kar i handled was spotless. I have worked more stiff actions while using a mauser than a mosin, no joke. I have a turkish model 1938 in good shape that works fine, but that kar I was handling took a ton of effort to cycle. I prefer straight bolt handles to curved ones for that particular reason: they work better.
Both the Kar98 and Mosin-Nagant are fantastic rifles. Everyone claims that the Mosin-Nagant is an awful rifle due to how cheap it is, little do they know that's due to supply and demand. The Russians pumped out a ton of those rifles so thats why they are so cheap. As a gun collector with over 200+ firearms, I must say both are fantastic and all variants are of high quality. Though I like the cavalry variant of the Kar the most, as it is comfortable. But, if you were to buy a Mosin-Nagant, know
Also, many mainstream histories leave much to be desired. Until relatively recently, no one had access to Soviet documents from the era, and most books are therefore written entirely from the German POV, which tends to make everything sympathetic to them (look at Beevor's books for an example). Many were also written in the light of the Cold War, which makes their value doubtful at best. Try reading "When Titans Clased" by David Glantz for a view from the Soviet side.
@kilroywuzhere1 That's correct. The Mosin Nagant is a simple design that is easy to repair,maintain,tough and accurate . The Russian factory produced "massive " 37 million Mosins and Germany produced K98 14 million . Same goes for Russian Tank T-34 is #1 in top 10 ,simple to built and still in used today.
I've got a 1942 M91/30 with replica PU scope. Fantastic rifle. Also a 1942 RC Kar98k w/ irons. Pretty much all mis-matched but functions great and is very accurate as well. Both strong designs, and would trust either of them. My favorite bolt action of WWII would have to be either SMLE or No.4 though. That slippery-smooth bolt, 10-rnd mag, and easy to use clips are quite advantageous in a world where bolt actions are still very prominent. Quite accurate too. I just love historic firearms lol
I know they do, i have over 15 guns in my house, and it is my favorite one to shoot. I really love it.
As a PU scope owner,I can assure you they hold zero very very well
The 700 action is a modified mauser action, the most obvious difference is the fact that it is a push feed in contrast to the mausers control feed. Push feed rifles became more common in the post war period as they were cheaper and easier to manufacture, and did not need as tight tollerances for it to funtion.
cont'd-- version either for the same reasons. "It'll collapse if we invade! It'll collapse if we take their industrial regions! It'll collapse if we take Moscow!" It was just an extremely strong state; the Nazis could not have overcome it even if Hitler had listened more to his generals. And if he had, he probably wouldn't have invaded the Soviet Union because they knew they could not win against them in a fair fight.
Excellent video Comrade, Truly a great Achievement!
I remember seeing a video demonstration of an M1 Garand being topped up with individual rounds. It looked hard and was admitted to be cumbersome. The video also demonstrated how to eject a half spent clip.
Neither of these were recommended for combat as it was too prone to failure but was apparently useful for maintenance in a non combat environment.
i have a nagant and a mauser. I would trust the mauser with my life not the nagant. the nagant is sluggish and tends to jam. The reason russia won was because they had 30 russians to one german.
You're an idiot
Oh, Yes. This story was popular. It is also true as all your stories about Syria.
Russian soldiers were in fact outnumbered in the beginning of the war. They took on more casualties overall, since those first armies of theirs were wiped out by the Germans and had to be quickly replaced.
Hard to acknowledge what happens if to put Mauser and Mosin in the mud guess which one will shoot?
@checkacola the video doesnt talk about rifles but about the scopes
True! Over-extended and not prepared. Excellent point.
I love both these rifles for different reasons. The Mosin is so cheap(picked up my second for $99 four days ago!) and so fun to shoot. It's so rugged and tough and you have to respect the simple yet bulletproof design. The mauser though, is just a work of art. I love the "click" when you pull the bolt up or push it down and it's bolt was revolutionary. Both are just awesome rifles, you have to respect them both.
@bleushift What happens if the zero gets thrown off during battle ? Or he needs to zero for a further distance ? With the K98 you have to F around with a tool with bullets going over your head. The 91/30 you just turn the knobs a bit with your hand. Simple as that
@ethanreipold88 mostly the bolt head to sand down make sure you clean it REALLY good after doing so because it seems after i did there were some shavings left and made it more of a gritty action but doing this might help it but ok cya
Mosin Nagant is number 1! Nice documentary comrade.
@Gungeek Yeah the locking lugs are on the rear of the bolt near the bolt handle instead of at the front.
@SashaVedernikov Okay sounds fair, but which one had better lens quality? The Germans were well known for making excellent quality lenses. My high school had two pre-WWII German light microscopes that beat the modern ones by miles.
@MrLolx2u
In that era, you zeroed a scope at the range, and left it alone. From the range, you took it out to war and compensated by holdover IF NECESSARY- sniping in those days was done at considerably closer ranges and fooling with knobs was unnecessary. Both rifles would have been zeroed at a range, then left alone.
Ability to zero a rifle in combat is completely irrelevant because you wouldnt have time to zero it properly, no matter how easy it was. You'd just compensate by holdover.
I've got a 1937 Tula Mosin Nagant 91/30. It's beat to hell with gouges all over the frame, scrapes and scratches on the receiver and butt-plate; very much a rifle that saw alot of action, but the action of the trigger and bolt is smooth, never jams, and the bullet goes exactly where I want. K98's are surely one of the most influential and proven rifles of all time, but my Mosin was designed to be reliable, simple, and crude enough to crack a few skulls with it's buttplate. I need nothing more.
@SashaVedernikov When I read PinteofShite's comment I believe he was referring to the problems of zeroing the scope not adjusting for range and windage. I am sure you are aware that they are separate things. A scope that required a special tool for something that required a rapid adjustment would not have lasted very long in a battle situation. Incidentally, none of the books I have, including Peglar's, mentions anything about the Zeiss requiring a tool for range adjustment.
@SashaVedernikov
And if you're wondering...I actually own a Chinese Type 53, which is a clone of the M44 after Russia came out with the SKS and decided selling some tooling to the Chinese. Some consider these hit-or-miss rifles which is true because some used Soviet spare parts (like mine), but the quality control was higher because they weren't wartime guns. Mosins get a bad rap simply because the wartime infantry guns were cranked out fast with low inspection standards for volume.
what is more dangerous weapon watching this video is TH-cam advertising video unfriendly before watching it!!!! crazy channel each year turn worst!!!
@ethanreipold88 and you can't single load a kar98k because the claw extractor won't fit around the rim you have to have a cartridge in the magazine to have the claw actually grab onto it unlike the mosin were it's push fed and you don't need to
@jakethewhale it's a 3.5 variable zoom they were most likely sighted at 3 400 yards now what if you lose you're zero which is HIGHLY common because it was banged around and someone is at 800 yards ?
The PU scope reticle moves around the field of view. The Zeiss reticle stays stationary - this isn't taken into account surprisingly in this video.
okay, I have a Tula Mosin Nagant 91/30 made in 1934 (standard infantry rifle, not a sniper). at 100 yards it is dead on when I use Brown Bear 178 grain ammo.
I recently bought a tin can of 440 rounds Soviet Surplus from the 1980's. it is 147grain. At 100 yards, it shoots considerably low and to the left.
my question is, what was the typical bullet grain load for a typical soviet infantryman with a mosin nagant. Because I am thinking this 1980s stuff was meant for a different weapon like PKM.
@Whatheonearth If the Mosin is so strong and great, why are most bolt systems based on the K98? are you staying the mosin is stronger that Mauser 98?
@SashaVedernikov Stalingrad was a large city, and after it was bombed it provided the snipers with perfect environment. But what I don't understand is this: Were the snipers at Stalingrad, both russian and german, taking a number of shots at their enemies to zero in the scope, and only after that were they actually killing? Or is it that they chose their hunting grounds, and then they had land marks for ranges, making easier to estimate the range to target?
A simple field strip and clean is pretty darn fast and easy with any military bolt action (at least any one I've owned). Granted the bolt design on the Mauser is more complicated, you don't need to strip a bolt for a field clean.
Cool video. My only gripe is that comparing 2 rifles only by the amt of shots necessary to zero it is not a fair comparison. A sniper does not zero-in their rifle during the battle, it should already be zeroed. A better comparison would be accuracy, range, etc.
It was exceptionally rugged, the high rate of fire was useful, and we know participants in the war loved it because both sides loved to use them - they were very popular among German soldiers who could acquire them.
The MP-40 was primarily designed with war production in mind; it was cheap and not that reliable, and I'd argue that its rate of fire was too low.
Stop getting your facts from Call of Duty.
@SashaVedernikov I think you are confusing how the Zeiss scope on the Mauser was zeroed and how it was adjusted for range. It did not require a screwdriver to adjust for range as that was done easily by turning the appropriate drum. The problem for the German snipers was that the scope would easily go out of zero. All it took was for the rifle to receive a hard bump and it would require re-zeroing. This required the screwdriver and time, something that was not available in Stalingrad.
There is something to be said for scopes that require tools - they are very inconvenient to adjust, but keep their zero well. You can set your zero and keep it there and it won't get bumped when you are crawling around. At the fun gun range I want something easy to adjust, in battle I want something that holds zero if bumped and is hard to adjust. These guys are at the gun range, not crawling around in battle.
I grew up on a farm in Kentucky and was shooting a .22 Marlin at 6, under my Father's supervision, of course. I could outshoot him by 7, and by 12 he'd let me shoot as often as I wanted, as long as I didn't take my younger brothers with me. I would have "shoot-offs" with another friend, and we became exceptionally accurate. Shot later at summer camps and on military prep school team. Made qualifying Expert on the M16 very easy! I was a Navy Officer, so being a sniper was not possible.
I think it's a good comparison which would be easier to adjust the scope on in the field, though. That'd be a significant advantage in a city-scape where the range of targets could vary considerably.
@ethanreipold88 not with a control fed rifle the claw extractor it won't catch the rim when in the chamber like i said the only advantage to is is if you plan to use it for DG and not everyone is interested in that
Excellent the CARL GUSTAFS 6,5x55 !!! Barrel sub moa
Germans did also attach Russian scopes sometimes, instead of capturing a rifle, and having an ammonition problem. But that was rare or else more common during the later parts of the war.
That's not how you zero a rifle lmfao
@goatmurray Doesn't matte rin the past or now, if a sniper takes a longer time to zero his rifle using a stupid tool while facing another sniper or just a normal infantry, your life is in danger cause hand twist saved roughly 1/3 of a sec rather than searching for tools and screw the scopes till it zeroed and may i ask? In the dark, no matter what sniper you used and you needed to zero you scope and you can't even see you god damn hands, would you rather use a hand twisted or tool zeroed scope?
Aren't those the Tigrs though?
Anyway, just got an ex-sniper that I'm going to convert back.
Bore and rifling looks good, crown is good too.
Haven't shot it yet, I'll have to check it out.
@F4Wildcat depending on were you live the price may not be as cheap as you think. In Australia sporting ammo for 8mm is easier to find than 7.62x 54R
I'm currently in the process of purchasing my very first rifle in Australia, I have a choice of either a refurbished Mosin-Nagant M91/30 for $450 or an unissued, perfect condition Portuguese contract Mauser K98 for $2850. The K98 is absolutely beautiful, it's shipment was lost on the way to Germany and thus it stayed in storage in pristine condition for over 70 years. The Mosin is rugged and not nearly as attractive as the Mauser, but I still admire the weapon. I'm not sure what to go with.
@goatmurray and besides spotters would not tell them to adjust there sights (example: one click left 2 clicks up) if it was completely useless and no need to do so i know now they use Kentucky windage more than actual adjustments but it's still very important to adjust your sights
@SashaVedernikov Actaully, they were snipers, and they didnt have a rush to shoot, but to make that clear instant kill shot. That's why the German KAR98 had an advantage having it to be screw just because it wouldnt hit any thing and misscorrecly change the crosshair position
@SashaVedernikov I remember seeing this show/episode I just can't remember the name! Do You?
@goatmurray why would scope be adjusted to sights out of range in which that caliber can't reach (i know it can be it's very rare)
luv this, luv this vid, luv you man
@SashaVedernikov If the tool is required to adjust for range, then the german scope is not sniper friendly. It also forces a sniper to take his weapon away from it's target.
Almost like the Boer Wars, the Boers relied heavily on their guns for food to survive, one war broke out the English very quickly discovered that their enemy are very well concealed and very very good shots
For example one battle british killed were 1200 where the boers lost only 8
But just the fact that with each pull of the trigger, the cylinder has to force itself forward to make a seal with the barrel makes for a strong trigger pull. I think you'll only be able to get it so light.
Both a fairly similar ballistics wise, the 7.62x54 tends to drop a bit quicker then the 7.92x57 but is very close in performance. Plus i think you may be thinking in videogame terms.
the mosin nagant m91/30 is one of the best rifles ever made. i own 2 m91/30 rifles and 2 m44 carbines.
That's just the scope design I was hoping for a comparison between the actuall bolt actions.
Its possible to top off the the rifle. But its tricky and not worth the effort. But its possible. I'll have to get a video of it one of these days.
@ufloetz
I dont think a Lee Enfield has a mauser action?
@1ohtaf1 Tight tolerance If anything the control feed can get a far more tighter action as it can allow 3 locking lugs
@captjackwhite I thought marines still used 20" M16A2/A4s not 14.5" M4s
The only plus I can see the Nagant pistol having is the ability to have a suppressor attached to it. Other than that, the way it's loaded, shot, and the heavy trigger pull would make it rather difficult to use in a fight. That's just what I gather, however. I never shot it before. Just studied lightly on it.
what documentary is this, THNX
I love the Mosin Nagant! It's my favorite sniper rifle on Call of Duty!
Mosin - is th best.
In our times is one of the best sniper rifles) I have one and never forget 41-45
Question: When talking the german scope off its turret mounts is Zero lost?
@SashaVedernikov
It does whether or not it's significant to your use/specifications. The fact is that one side of the scope has more field of view to the side of the crosshairs than the other which isn't an optimal arrangement. As for the PU scopes being perfectly aligned I'm figuring most were dead on, PU Tula snipers were all hand-picked gems whereas the average Mauser sniper was little more than a standard infantry gun. Fact: Russians used Zeiss scopes then switched to PU due to price.
Okay so the Soviet scope is easier to zero, but which scope keeps its zero longer? Also, you're supposed to shot three round groups to eliminate other factors like ammunition lol.
Sounds like WWII Soviet Propaganda to me, ha ha
Propoganda is your whole life
@ethanreipold88 but hell at most you can just do work with it like i did with mine i just sanded down my bolt cleaned it and sanded down the stock and it helps
It seems the Germans scope was trying to offer accuracy beyond what was actually needed, and in the process traded in practicality.
Soviets were also did quite well in close combat, with an abundance of PPSh-41 sub-machine guns, greater number than German MP38/40, and arguably more deadly with 71 rounds at 900rpm.
For example, lots of PPSh-41 were used in German service (converted to 9x19mm) but very few MP38/40 were used by the Soviets.
@SashaVedernikov I agree that the russian system is easier to use. But I was curious how would that help when you have to shoot more then 1 shot to land 1 hit. How would they know to dial in 500 yards and not 450 yards or 550 yards. I think that snipers, german and russian, would chose where to shoot, and that allows them to zero in a certain range. Can any one give a combat range for Stalingrad? 500 yards seems a very long range in city combat, close to nonexistent.
I think both rifles are nice, but I think I would opt for the Mauser overall.
@SashaVedernikov OK. Just a thought. I have never "played" with one. Thanks for the info..
were can i buy k98 sniper rifle?
@Eddythebandkid haha i still to me its more reliable weather can't fog it up and you can stay hidden more when using it
@CSTactical1 6.5 is still used for bench rifles and has tons of records
@MrDip02
It'll easily reach to 1000 yards. It's extremely popular in 1000-yard F-class competition.
It just doesnt reach that far often. An extra 400 yards isnt unfathomable, it just lacks energy at that range.
i love watching history right now i have my tv on on some ww2 show its become white noise to me still love it tho
@nyctasiaselesq believe it or not, snipers are very good at estimating ranges. (today they don't have to, they have a laser range finder, but they still are trained to do it old school) Snipers use natural landmarks as markers. Often they will scout the area out first and make it their hunting ground. They don't necessarily sneak into an area and start shooting.
They fight defensively in nature because they have to, they are outnumbered so they rely on being unseen and knowing the land better.
I have never seen this show before, so some off you may think this is a stupid question, but what is this show called?
@SashaVedernikov
I'd have to disagree with the 1903 being the best overall, at least in terms of potential beyond their stock unit. Granted it had a long service record...but one of the problems in terms of comparing it is which variant you would use from 1903 to the early 70's, and Germans did put captured scopes on K98's, which had the best BC slug of the time. Now when it comes to which makes the best rifle to modify into a perfect rifle, I'd have to go with the Mauser hands down.
However, I must say that the Mosin is a great rifle. Extremely accurate if original and correct.
Another thing about this video, one of the commentators makes reference to the fact that there was a Russian pre-war rifle culture that aided in providing experienced marksmen for the war effort. Hell, the same can be said for the Germans. German shooting clubs and shooting competitions are legendary. Neither side lacked well trained marksmen.
This is fairly interesting, though I'd much rather have the K98. My 1942 Izhevsk 91/30 is an absolute pig of a rifle, I'd sooner burn it for firewood rather than try and fight with it. I've done every trick in the book to make it smoother and more reliable, but it remains a Jam-0-Matic!
Weren't the PU scopes a hasty copy of a Zeiss? I know the earlier PEMs were.
@SashaVedernikov: Well actually Zeiss scopes are still one the clearest and most expensive scopes on the market up until this day. A lot of hunters used these scopes all around the world.
M39 is also a great rifle. Its sights in my opinion are perfect and its easier to aim with it. However its bolt action can be little stiff and needs time to get used to it. It also kicks like a horse no matter what bullets you use.
Its very hard to make a choice with these two. I love both guns, but maybe k98 a little more.
but the kar98 is more powerful than the mosin nagant in terms of damage, isn't it? I'm not too sure though, well anyways, tell me what you know or think.
@bleushift Thanks, I still love the K98 though, I used to own one (standard version) and loved the heck out of it :D
you're right. but there a quite a few Germans with 200+ kills. Many German kills where over greater distances.Hetzenhauer made a confirmed kill at 1100 mtrs. Not bad at all. Both are effective rifles, but me personally, I would go for the K98K (or a Lee Enfield Mk1 no 4) and yes I have all 3 of these rifles and shoot them.
Mosin's Rock.
those british guys are way too serious "five shots and that rifle is now zeroed" (dramatic serious face)
i think exactly the same, and my experience with hand regulated scopes is very bad
@jakethewhale also this video is just showing how easy it is to sight in your scopes since you don't need to use your tools the glass on your rifle will help your accuracy FAR more than people think the better the glass the better that accuracy in which the ziess did not seem to do the at most best at also it was more of an eye sore
While it is easier to zero (without tools) it is also easier to knock out of zero just by bumping those turrets up against things. And in combat, that is a very real concern.
@1169Timothy yeah no it's only best in certain situations like you said they would not be zeroing it in combat situations but it's just best when you need to quickly it's there for you
What episode is this so that i can watch the full length to it?
@MrDip02 and I'm certain that its more like 600. 6000 is a small army.
The Russians have a genius of making simple, robust, and reliable designs.
Its true and i love it
The kar i handled was spotless. I have worked more stiff actions while using a mauser than a mosin, no joke. I have a turkish model 1938 in good shape that works fine, but that kar I was handling took a ton of effort to cycle. I prefer straight bolt handles to curved ones for that particular reason: they work better.
Both the Kar98 and Mosin-Nagant are fantastic rifles. Everyone claims that the Mosin-Nagant is an awful rifle due to how cheap it is, little do they know that's due to supply and demand. The Russians pumped out a ton of those rifles so thats why they are so cheap. As a gun collector with over 200+ firearms, I must say both are fantastic and all variants are of high quality. Though I like the cavalry variant of the Kar the most, as it is comfortable. But, if you were to buy a Mosin-Nagant, know
@gusmoose1 I live in northern newengland and mosin- nagants are in allmost every gun shop you go into
Also, many mainstream histories leave much to be desired. Until relatively recently, no one had access to Soviet documents from the era, and most books are therefore written entirely from the German POV, which tends to make everything sympathetic to them (look at Beevor's books for an example). Many were also written in the light of the Cold War, which makes their value doubtful at best.
Try reading "When Titans Clased" by David Glantz for a view from the Soviet side.
you don't need tools to adjust the mounts, you can use empty shell cases
@SashaVedernikov
My mauser doesnt need tools to adjust its zero...and its original parts...
@kilroywuzhere1 That's correct. The Mosin Nagant is a simple design that is easy to repair,maintain,tough and accurate . The Russian factory produced "massive " 37 million Mosins and Germany produced K98 14 million . Same goes for Russian Tank T-34 is #1 in top 10 ,simple to built and still in used today.