Mosin-Nagant M91/59 Range Report (with pics)....

[Rubber_Duck]

My 91/59 has a worse barrel than that and it outshoots the hell out of it.

This is why I'm surprised at how well this one shoots. As I said in post #1, the bore on mine is dark and mildy pitted, but it shoots fabulously despite this.

 

[greensngravy]

My Tula 1943 M91/59 - New Pic's!!!

Just refinished and the beechwood is lookin' quite handsome... The metal is also terrific. Thanks to Dunham's Sporting Goods having a sale 50% off (reg $250). All matching stamped #'s.

Question: Can anyone tell me why my bolt has two different stamped #'s (one on top which matches receiver/mag/butt, and another on the side of the bolt body)? I checked a bunch of sites and couldn't find another M59 with this unique feature... Thanks for looking!!

 

[greensngravy]

My Three Refinished Babies - M91/30, M44, M91/59

Top - 1943 Ishevsk M91/30 Laminated

Center - 1948 Ishevsk M44 -all stamped matching numbers - unissued, with scout scope

Bottom - 1943 Tula M91/59 - all stamped matching numbers in Beechwood

I'm gonna quit buying these things for now...

 

[Coronach]

Do you know why they were doing this. Weren't the russians using SKS and AK47 rifles by 1959? Or were there just not enough?

No one knows for sure, but the conventional wisdom is that they were doing with their stock of M-Ns what they were also doing with their stock of Hitler's mausers. They were using slave labor to prep them for use in future conflicts, either by soviet troops or their proxies. The russians had a serious hoarding issue with weapons. If it was no longer immediately useful, it got slathered in cosmo, crated up and put into a warehouse for use "later". These weapons often found themselves thrust into the hands of revolutionaries or insurgents around the globe.

Mike

 

[greensngravy]

Help!! My 91/59 is shooting way too low!!

Just got back from the range today and the M59 is shooting about 12-18" low at the 100m rear site setting (at a 100 yard target).

My front site post looks a little high, and I had to adjust the rear site to the 600 M mark to get it to shoot on target!

Any ideas on what may be going on here? As I said the front site pin is a little high (sticks up just above the midpoint of the hood enclosure). You can see the front site pin in my previous posts.

Is there any good way to grind that site pin down without hurting the finish?

BTW, the trigger is fantastic, and the bolt is smooth as silk. Greensgravy

 

[greensngravy]

PS - using Siver Bear 203 gr. SP's

 

[gripper]

Might be a little heavy for what the rifle was originally sighted in with...OTOH,it USED to be a full sized 91-30 before it got reconfigured into a carbine...I used to run a M44 with heavy ball and shot right to the point of aim....lighter bullets were slightly low at 50-60 meters.
The 203 grainers may have more " barrel time" before theyexit the muzzle...or perhaps the shortened barrel IS having aneffect ( crown anyone?)...For giggles, borrow a "no-smithing" mount,out th erifle into a machine rest and see what happens at 50, 75 and 100 meters ...you got me thinking now...

 

[greensngravy]

Thanks - it would make more sense to me that the heavier bullet will shoot lower. They probly sited it in with 147 gr ammo, right? And I have searched other forums about MN's shooting low and they say the only thing you have to do is to ramp up the rear site until you get POA at 100 yds, which is what I did. But I sure would like to keep the rear site at the 100m mark and get POA that way. I don't think you can remove/replace the front site pin with a shorter one w/o ruining the site, can you? Thanks, GNG

 

[Duke of Doubt]

My information on these is they were intended for China or a Chinese client, but the Sino-Soviet schism nixed the deal and the guns were put into storage. By the time the Vietnam conflict heated up, China was producing its own guns for North Vietnam and there was no obvious use for these until they were sold off following the collapse of the East Bloc.

The unanswered question is, why they even bothered when they had all the M44 carbines salted away. Make-work, possibly, or arsenal training on a low order?

 

[greensngravy]

Lots more research to be done on this model - that's for sure. But I searched other M91/59 discussions and I haven't seen this problem crop up. I have heard about it on other models - Chinese T53, I think. I can live with it, it's just like a rubic's cube for me... what if I want to down a deer at 800m?? I'll be SOL (LOL)!!

 

[Rubber_Duck]

Interesting, my M91/59 shoots about 4-6 inches higher than point-of-aim with the 100m setting. It also shoots heavy and light ball to the same point of impact, no difference between the two, however long-range POI might be different.

 

[greensngravy]

If you look at my previous M91/59 pics, there is one of my muzzle/front sight. Does anything look that out of order there? If not, I'll just consider this one of the many MN mysteries that will never be figured-out. Like Amelia Earhart...

 

[RIATAC45]

Duck - I have one of those butt pads on my 91/30, it works ok. It does not fit very well, about 3/4" hangs below the stock.

The sights are in "arshins" and not meters or yards. An Arshin is equivilant to the average soldiers stride, approx 28", thus the reason for the POA/POI not exactly matching

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Arshins were only used on the M91 rifles, not the M91/30, the M38, the M44 or the M91/59.

 

[Rubber_Duck]

RIATAC45, Im not sure which buttpad you got. I ended up geting this one (from TickBite Supply/David's Collectibles):

It doesn't require modifying the rifle, simply swap out with the original metal buttplate, and it was cheap. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to do anything for recoil (it is made of hard rubber), but it helps a lot with the length of pull. However, I'm looking at other recoil pads that actually do what they're supposed to do. I don't like the slip-on ones.

 

[greensngravy]

M91/59 - shoots way low - Filed front sight pin down

I will try to check how this affected my POA at 100 yds when the rear sight is down to its lowest height (i.e., 100 m). I currently have to set the rear sight at 600m to hit the bullseye at 100 yds.

Initially, the front sight pin was too high, judging by my comparisons with my M44 and 91/30 front sight pins. I filed it down to exactly the length of my other front sight pins (just a hair above the radius of the sight hood).

I used a chainsaw blade file shrouded with a BIC pen outer shell cut down the center to protect the finish of the front sight hood. At first, the file didn't fit because the pin was too high so I used a plastic straw cut down the middle in the same fashion until I could get more clearance from filing down.

After filing, I checked the height of the rear sight compared to the 91/30 and they were identical.

So logic would tell me that this should work...stay tuned.

GNG

 

[nathan]

Mine has a tall front sight and it shoots low at 100 m setting at 100 yds. I have to raised the rear sight to the 4 notch to zero it at 100 yds. This seems to be common in M91.59s

 

[Coronach]

The unanswered question is, why they even bothered when they had all the M44 carbines salted away. Make-work, possibly, or arsenal training on a low order?

No, they had serious amounts of EVERYTHING salted away. M44s, M39s, 91/30s, K98s...you name it. They were converting what they percieved to be the least-useful design, the 91/30, into a carbine, which may prove to be more useful. Some of it was make-work, I'm sure, but when you have a surplus of trained almost-slave-labor and a stockpile of materials, it's a pretty low-cost proposition.

here's my question, how is the M91/59 different from the M39, in construction? I mean, I know that the 91/59 is a cut-down 91 and the M39 is not, but how are they different as far as final product goes?

Mike

 

[Rubber_Duck]

greensngravy,

Go easy with the filing of the front sight post. File only a little bit at a time and test fire to check for POI. Remember, it is a lot easier to take metal off than it is to put it back on.

 

[greensngravy]

"Go easy with the filing of the front sight post. File only a little bit at a time and test fire to check for POI. Remember, it is a lot easier to take metal off than it is to put it back on."

Point taken. I will not file anymore off now that it is filed down to a "normal" height. If it still shoots low, I'll just live with it.

GNG

 

[lionking]

greensgravy if you can get it to shoot bulls at 100yds or whatever range you desire simple by sliding the sight I would just leave it at that.I don't think I have one milsurp specially Mosin's and Mausers that shot right at 100yds having the sight set at the 100 meter or yard mark.Not even the AK's,I had to slide the sight to the 300 meter setting to hit POA at 100yds.

Now I have a Czech 98/22 that shoots low,with one slide to the next setting it shoots too high,never in the middle where I want it.In that case I will need to do something about the front sight.

Also in my Hungarian and Finnish Mosin's grain of bullet mattered.In the Hungarian it shot high with 150 gr,shot perfect elevation with 185gr and the opposite happened with my Finnish Mosin's,they shot high with heavy grain and right in the black with lighter 147 to 150gr.

I have also had times in a couple rifles where the same grain bullet shot different elevation and or windage just because of different manufacture.

 

[greensngravy]

Lionking:

Thanks for responding. Now I know it's not such a rare problem. I won't fiddle with the front sight anymore - it looks just about perfect in terms of post height now compared to my other 3 MN's.

 

[Rubber_Duck]

Hey guys, I just picked up another one! This time it's a 1942 Izzy, but virtually identical to the one I have. However, this new one has a pristine bore, but the trigger isn't as good. Can't I have both?

Anyways, here is my pair of M91/59s, the new one at the top, and my first one on the bottom:

$107 out the door.

I'll report back when I get a chance to take this one to the range.

 

[greensngravy]

M91/59 built on '29 Hex Izzy Receiver

Is this a more rare example of an M59 than most? It looks pretty decent: all stamped matching numbers, and the bore looks decent. What do you think it's worth?? It's at a local Dunham's, but it's not at the sale price of $119 yet...it's still $250.

OTOH, they DO have a 1930 hex izzy 91/30 with all stamped matching #'s for $119. Decent bore and great finish all around. What do you think about that one??

GNG

 

[Rubber_Duck]

greensngravy,

I'd buy both . Of course, wait for the M91/59 to go on sale ($250 is a joke).

That M91/59 DOES sound like an interesting piece though, Most I've seen are built on later Izhvesks.