Mosin Target Barrel

[Hefights]

See this offering at Tennessee Guns. Anybody have an experience with these, or any speculation on which rifles they would fit?

http://www.tnguns.com/shop/

[starmetal]

I"m wondering if they just are the Finn barrels like on the Finn 39. The Finn barrels were all better then the Russian barrels. I think the barrels are all interchangeable. In my opinion if you want an accurate Mosin buy a Finn 39 or Finn 28.

[Art]

I"m wondering if they just are the Finn barrels like on the Finn 39. The Finn barrels were all better then the Russian barrels. I think the barrels are all interchangeable. In my opinion if you want an accurate Mosin buy a Finn 39 or Finn 28.

Why are the Finnish barrels "better" than Russian barrels? Maybe I should say why would a Finnish barrel be "better" than a peacetime Russian barrel, wartime barrels being a whole 'nuther thing.

[starmetal]

Because the Finns took more care in keeping the specifications tighter. Some of the companies that re arsenaled the Finn 39's for example were Tikka, Sako, Valmet. The Finn 39 generally run a .310 groove and the Finn 28 generally run a .308 groove. The Russians ran the groove all over the place anywhere from .310 to .318. The Finn 28 is great for reloading using .308 bullet which aren't a good fit in the Russians fat groove diameter rifles, although they can work but without great accuracy. The Finns have better sights and triggers. The Finn 28 and 39 are like the European Springfields....meaning they are very accurate well made rifles.

[Art]

In my experience good sights and good trigger are every bit as important as good barrel, assuming the barrel in question isn't worn our or bent of course.

[starmetal]

Art,

Read this:

http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/finnish_mosin_nagantm39.asp

[Art]

Art,

Read this:

http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/finnish_mosin_nagantm39.asp

Now that was interesting stuff. Its too bad no one ever went to a turned down bolt on standard Mosin-Nagant rifles

[starmetal]

On a rifle that wasn't scoped I think they felt there wasn't a need and a straight out handle was maybe faster to grab in the head of battle. I have read that the Russian sniper rifle weren't anything special, that is they weren't a special manufacture or special barrel or anything. They didn't use that high of a scope magnification either. They did have a turned down bolt handle. Something else interesting when the Russian military called for a smg they wanted it fast and cheap. What evolved was the PPsh 41 shooting the 7.62x25 Tokarev pistol round. The interesting part is that they at first used Mosin Nagant rifle barrels and I believe get two or more barrels out of one rifle barrel. If you noticed the Russians small arms of WWII where all 7.62 caliber....that is rifle, smg, and pistols.

[Art]

On a rifle that wasn't scoped I think they felt there wasn't a need and a straight out handle was maybe faster to grab in the head of battle. I have read that the Russian sniper rifle weren't anything special, that is they weren't a special manufacture or special barrel or anything. They didn't use that high of a scope magnification either.

A turned down bolt handle is much faster to operate than the straight variety, that it wasn't necessary, especially since the location is in front of the reciever bridge makes the bolt slower to operate anyhow. A turned down bolt handle as far back as possible gives the highest practical rate of fire..

As far as the 'scopes on the Mosin-Nagant sniper rifles, they were either 3.5 or 4 power which was about what everybody except the U.S. Marines used. Our army telescopic sights were just over 2X, the Brits about 3.5X, the Germans 2X - 4X depending on the 'scope (the Germans were always critically short of telescopic sights and some of the emergency ones like the ZF41 were very marginal.)

[starmetal]

A turned down bolt handle is much faster to operate than the straight variety, that it wasn't necessary, especially since the location is in front of the reciever bridge makes the bolt slower to operate anyhow. A turned down bolt handle as far back as possible gives the highest practical rate of fire..

As far as the 'scopes on the Mosin-Nagant sniper rifles, they were either 3.5 or 4 power which was about what everybody except the U.S. Marines used. Our army telescopic sights were just over 2X, the Brits about 3.5X, the Germans 2X - 4X depending on the 'scope (the Germans were always critically short of telescopic sights and some of the emergency ones like the ZF41 were very marginal.)

You are correct in what you said, but I guess I should have said "easier to grab". Don't forget the Russian equipment was set up for extreme cold winter conditions (Finns too) and a bolt handle close to the stock such as a turned down one is harder to grab with heavy mitts or gloves then one sticking straight out. it's also faster to produce too.

[gwp]

This is from Gun Broker:

“It is a reprofiled barrel from a UK-59 threaded to fit a 91/30 receiver. Requires extensive final fitting.”

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=201745055

[sop2510]

The straight bolt handle versus the turned-down bolt handle is a moot point if you're lefthanded like me. Though I have found it easier to slap the straight bolt handle on the recocking stroke.

[starmetal]

This is from Gun Broker:

“It is a reprofiled barrel from a UK-59 threaded to fit a 91/30 receiver. Requires extensive final fitting.”

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=201745055

So much for that being a target barrel then. It's nothing more then a thick machine gun barrel.

[Mobile Marksman]

A turned-down bolt handle is not much faster to operate than a straight bolt handle - I've used both in rapid-fire stages and I prefer straight bolt handle on open-sighted rifles. The main advantage to the turned-down bolt handle is that it is out of the way for carrying and handling.

The Finn Mosin Nagant rifles on average had more care put into their manufacture than the Soviet Rifles. The early Russian M91 rifles were really nicely made the latter ones were much rougher. The big differences on the Finn rifles was that they improved the trigger, bedding, stock and sights - As well as making an exceptional barrel compared to a stock Russian/Soviet M91 or M91/30. Compare rifle to rifle on the range and you'll be a Finn rifle believer.

M28 had a bore of .3095 - The M28/30 had the .308 bore. The M39 had .310 bore. The Russian M91/30 can be found with a wider range of bore diameters, .310-.312+

The Russian/Soviet Mosin Nagant rifles were certainly accurate enough in comparison to it's contemporary bolt action rifles in WW1 & WW2. And, the sniper M91/30s were very effective and clearly accurate enough.

The turned-down Mosin Nagant sniper bolt handle is not particulary "quick" in relation to the straight standard handle - In fact I think that it is balkier. Also the bolt handle located in front of the receiver bridge makes you reach further to operate the bolt than a Mauser-type action - Not too bad in my opinion though and still can be operated rapidly.

[JAYFMT]

So much for that being a target barrel then. It's nothing more then a thick machine gun barrel.

You might want to read this post on the surplus forum, it will change your mind.

http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=95625