Cosmoline
Member
"sucked bad" in what way? Rough machining marks on the receivers? You haven't identified any specific flaws. What is it the makers were doing or not doing that you think made them substandard?
Cosmoline said:"sucked bad" in what way? Rough machining marks on the receivers? You haven't identified any specific flaws. What is it the makers were doing or not doing that you think made them substandard?
Ash said:I would love to have it pointed out what design characteristics make the Mosin inferior to the other rifles as a marshal arm.
swingset said:Sucked as in poor metal to wood fit (bedding), sucked as in inconsistent throating, rough rifling, sucked as in poor bolt lockup, sucked as in warped barrels (the Finns noted this during adoption of their first Mosins).
swingset said:Speaking specifically of the Russian 91/30, clunky straight bolt action, poor sights, only 5 round capacity, poor trigger (generally).
Even as early as 1900, the No1 Enfield had surpassed the Mosin as a combat arm. Higher capacity, faster action (more aimed firepower), and more compact.
I love the Mosin for its strengths (rugged, simple, reliable), but it has obvious weaknesses compared to other arms issued during its span....especially by WWII.
Jesus you're like a petulant 12 year old. I'm sick of arguing, sick of typing, sick of playing ping pong with you. Your mind is made up, and there's no winning this because you won't relent until you convince me that the Mosin is as good as its counterparts....or better.Cosmoline said:blah blah blah.
swingset said:Jesus you're like a petulant 12 year old. I'm sick of arguing, sick of typing, sick of playing ping pong with you. Your mind is made up, and there's no winning this because you won't relent until you convince me that the Mosin is as good as its counterparts....or better.
I'll go ahead and agree (to shut you up) that the Mosin ranks #1 as the most well-crafted long arm EVER. Mmmkay?
It's also the most accurate, modern, and deliciously wonderful ergonomic thing the world has ever seen.
It will out shoot every No4 ever made, and their horrible 2-piece stocks that dominated Bisley for 40 years. It shatters the Swede in fit and finish. It decimates the 03A3 for feel and balance, it's awesome stubby straight bolt is so fast you can bump fire it.
Good god. You happy?
NineseveN said:In other words, I have no counter to your arguments, so I am throwing a fit and leaving.
This was a prety cool discussion until the temper rose. Hopefully it can get back on track soon.
jeremywills said:You say you have had over a 100 of them. I wont argue that out of a hundred different rifles you would have a lot of hands on experience with them. You did say that some were good. So its just possible that you got a lot of the shot out ones?
YMMV but most Mosins in thier prime were good enough. If the Russians were so bad at making Military weponary then then the US Govt. probably wasted everyones time with the whole Cold War thing. My 2 cents.
swingset said:If you love your Mosins, and believe they are all tack drivers, then that's really really wonderful for you. I wish I had such a sunny outlook about everything I own. I don't believe my Jeep will win at Sebring next year, it's difficult being a realist amongst dreamers.
Good lord.
NineseveN said:Dear sir, I do not own a Mosin, in fact, I don't really like them much at all. I have read up on them and learned a bit of their history but that's about it. I was making an observation as an unbiased party. I think the points made against you were valid, and based on the demeanor of the posters as compared to yours, easier to swallow. But hey, enjoy the Jeep.
Ash said:There are Mosins that don't shoot, but it is silly to say most of them don't
I said some are very good shooters, most are not. Most are combat accurate, some are pitiful.
Originally Posted by Cosmoline
What I take issue with is your conclusion that most Mosin-Nagants are not good shooters.
swingset said:I never said that. I said some are very good shooters, most are not.