why sporterize?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You should check out some of Caribou's posts to see what an intact Mosin can do in the right hands!

You don't need a bent bolt or a scope to bring down game. This assumption that such modifications are required is just the sort of narrow-mindedness I object to.
 
You don't need a rifle to bring down game, either, Cosmo. Hell, you could just take your whole tribe and run it to death like a Kudu on the African plains.
 
You don't need a bent bolt or a scope to bring down game. This assumption that such modifications are required is just the sort of narrow-mindedness I object to.
Click to expand...

I usually agree with most of what you have to say, but this is one thread where I think you are off base. Since the Mosin has been brought up I will focus on it. I have shot a stock Mosin and honestly I HATE the straight bolt. Shot a bubba'd Mosin with a bent bolt and I personally felt more comfortable. Same thing about the scope. I pride myself on my ability to shoot open sights well, but when it comes to REALLY shooting well, a scope, or a set of target sights make a huge difference. (Even on a mosin). If you want to keep yours the way you like them, well fine! But I just don't see the crime in others doing the same!
 
sporterizing can be summed up with one simple definition.

Sport-er-riz-ing: the act of modyfying a weapon from the configuration it was designed for into a configuration it was never meant for.

ie, dont cut down the stock and barrel of a 1903 or mosin nagant to 18 inches so its "easier' for little suzy or johnny or drunken uncle billy to carry through the woods while deer hunting, when you could have gotten a 16 inch barreled lever gun that would give the same accuracy and general power on deer at 150 yards.
 
dont cut down the stock and barrel of a 1903 or mosin nagant to 18 inches so its "easier' for little suzy or johnny or drunken uncle billy to carry through the woods while deer hunting, when you could have gotten a 16 inch barreled lever gun that would give the same accuracy and general power on deer at 150 yards.
Click to expand...

Why not?

I still don't see the problem.
 
The problem is there's a finite number of these rifles, and the folks who tend to do the hacking are also the least likely to know one from 'tother. A lot of us love the old war rifles, so why not leave them to us and get the rifle you really want, which is a modern sporter? I keep hearing how people never hurt the rare ones, but I've seen and held the ruined disasters left when a rare one gets crosswise of Bubba. An anti with a blowtorch couldn't do more damage. It's horrific.

As was noted earlier, if you want to do a home build that's fantastic. The best way is to get a receiver in the white and a premium barrel. You can make yourself a wildcat tackdriver or anything you want. It's a load of fun. And in the end you have put one more rifle into circulation which is a good thing.
 
I would not qualify Cosmoline as going berserk. Seems to me like he is just passionate about old military rifles. Something I can relate to. I do not tend to criticize a sporterization IF it is well done. There are too many hack jobs out there. These guns are uglier and less funcional than if they were left stock. And in my experience the majority of them are like that.

As one posted earlier, it one finds a Swedish Mauser barrelled action and wants to put a sporter style stock on it then that is just chipper. If one wants to use a Mosin action go right ahead with that as well.
 
How many of those old rifles do you own, Cosmoline? Thousands? Hundreds?

I've seen an amazing historic Western gun collection -- with a big book tracking provenance and specific historical significance -- in a modest rural home in a Western state. I don't know of a museum with a collection like what I saw, short of the Smithsonian, perhaps. There's nothing saying that you couldn't do that, especially with rifles that are worth a tiny fraction of the price of a Colt Navy in VG condition with significant provenance, or a well-preserved 1874 Sharps that belonged to a well-known buffalo hunter. He had several long walls of close-spaced racks of such.

Expecting bubba to buy rifles YOU are passionate about, and preserve them for YOU because YOU want him to is well, as we used to put it in the schoolyard, LAME, Cosmoline. Go and buy all the rifles you can get your hands on, put them in a climate-controlled warehouse, and keep them pristine. Or take schoolkids out and let them shoot a few. Whatever you want.

Otherwise, while it's fine for you to try to influence others to share your values, Bubba's gun is NOT YOURS. And ultimately, if you're not willing to spend YOUR money to buy it off of him, it's none of your damned business what he does with it -- even if you and I both don't like it.
 
As others have noted, it was a different day and age. Many were tinkerers and such projects were fun. These days, it's different and the economics don't make sense. However, for some economics aren't an issue - having a fun project is. Regardless, it's their money and business. Ditto re someone hacking up an old, valuable gun.

Not taking a shot at anypne's position, but perhaps this issue is one the NRA or someone could take up as an educational effort - IE, produce a simple primer: "The do's / don't's and considerations to make before altering a potentially historically significant firearm."

Publicize it, put it on the website and otherwisde make the info available. I imagine many would check it out before taking on "projects."

That said - IMO some of the older sporterized arms DO have historical significance, as they represent an American shooting era. In that "golden age" after WWII, people tinkered with projects, experimented with wildcats, new loads, and really pushed the envelope in a lot of ways. Many "everyday guys" could contribute and participate solely because the low cost of these milsurps allowed them to. A lot of the work they did was done very well and a lot was done "okay." IMO, the truly nasty hack jobs are a minority.

I own a couple sporterized milsurps and am always on the look out for ones that are nicely done, unfinished or otherwise just need TLC to be shooting again. They become projects.

One I got as a gift from a WWII vet and dear family friend is a great example of the "golden era." It was a matching numbered bring back K98. My friend was a lifelong shooter and a machinist by trade. He cut the stock, turned down the bolt, mounted an old Weaver 4X, varnished the stock and used it as his "meat / loaner gun." I'll be passing a decent-looking, fine-shooting 8mm and its history on to my grandson.

It's all how we look at such things IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Otherwise, while it's fine for you to try to influence others to share your values, Bubba's gun is NOT YOURS. And ultimately, if you're not willing to spend YOUR money to buy it off of him, it's none of your damned business what he does with it -- even if you and I both don't like it.
Click to expand...

A.B., you have valid points. It is Bubba's gun to do with as he pleases, and neither Cosmo (nor I, nor you) have a right to impose our wishes upon him.

However, there is nothing wrong with -- and everything right with -- making a strenuous effort to educate and guide other gun folks about such matters. No, we can't make their decisions for them, but we can try to help them see the value in what they have, the potential loss in value likely to happen because of their planned modifications, and even the simple (usually disadvantagous) economics of trying to build a modern Remlinchester out of a classic piece of militaria.

There are plenty of folks who will say, "yes, I hear you saying that I shouldn't, but I don't care. This is my grandpappy's 1941 Johnson rifle and I want to hunt with it, and all I need to do is cut down the barrel so I don't keep whacking it when I get out of the truck, and add a set of fiber optic sights to help out my bad eyes, and it would look really good with a Krylon camoflage job." And, that's their right. Cosmo, or any of us, can rant and rave until we're weaping, but nothing we do can infringe on his right to fire up the acetylene torch and belt sander.

On the other hand, I've seen quite a few people, here on THR, come and ask about cutting their old mil-surp and leave here with a completely new appreciation for what they have, or at least having seen that they'd be better off selling it to an interested collector and purchasing something closer to what they think they need.

Why not at least try? In stating the facts, we can harm no one -- can infringe on the rights of no one -- and we may keep a few more pristine classics in circulation. That is a goal we should strive for.

-Sam
 
The current popularity of over restoring military surplus rifles is in my opinion no different than sporterizing the rifle. It is far removed from it's original configuration, smooth shiny stocks, perfect metal finish. Blasphemy. Hand me that hacksaw.
 
FWIW, if you want the garage sporterizer to even listen to your opinion of what he should do with his own propery,maybe you should first stop calling him "Bubba".
 
I come from a time when the DCM sold milsurps for less than ten bucks, while a Model 70 was upwards of sixty bucks. Gunsmith labor was couple of bucks an hour. That oughta tell folks something, right there.

I agree that educating folks about our changed times is a Good Thing. But a bunch of snark in griping against "Bubba" modifications doesn't educate, it angers. It gets a reaction of, "Up yours, I'll do what I want, not what you want."
 
"Up yours, I'll do what I want, not what you want."
Click to expand...

If you ask me, the real history of America is summed up in that sentence.

I'd rather have an America full of people who believe that deep in their hearts, with not a single Mosin left intact, than an America full of Downtown Historical Preservation Society biddies (with your money, not theirs, of course) and all the military rifles ever made, left pristine.

For what it's worth, much as I'd hate to see those old rifles get trashed, you can hack up every Garand, every Civil War rifled musket, every 1866 Winchester, before I want to see you hack up the spirit of this country.

The fact is, the post-war "sporterized" rifle, for better or worse, represents the spirit that built modern America. The guns produced by Stalinist Russia do not.

I still remember the small machine shops and garage innovators that my dad took me to see. I remember when boys played with chemistry sets and built go-karts, dreaming of inventing something and becoming a titan of industry, not going to law school and helping to chase American productivity overseas.

There's my rant. Worrying more about preserving the relics of the Soviet past than preserving the crumbling foundations of America's future is a sickness.
 
Last edited:
Art, I certainly agree with you. I cringe at "Bubba" and "Fudd" because labeling folks like that just insults them -- and insulting someone is the first step in convincing them to DISAGREE with you. If you can't create empathy and convey the message that your advice will benefit someone, how will you teach them anything?

A.B., I don't think the spirit of America is "Up Yours." That's pretty poor. A spirit of individualism, certainly. A willingness to take a chance, and go against the conventional wisdom in the pursuit of a dream, absolutely. But pure, crass, self-defeating contrarianism? No way. There's lots of folks who are stupid, ornery cusses who will jump into a wood chipper just 'cause someone else told them not to. But idiots like that didn't make America great, and embody few, if any, of the principles that will keep it that way.

What made America great is an ability to learn from each other and from history, and build on and improve upon those lessons, and to give a leg up to those who will follow them. Those who will go on to continue the cycle of learning and enlightenment.

If we're too mean to teach, and to ornery or stupid to learn, we'll have nothing left of value and no way to appreciate or create things of value for ourselves. How is that the spirit of America?

I work every day on projects that are affected by those "Historic(al) [SIC] Preservation Society biddies" -- sometimes I work with them and sometimes to oppose them. But I've seen almost universally that the best things they (and the SHIPOs, and the DOI) accomplish are not through coersion, but through enlightening and educating people to value treasures they'd not had the discernment to comprehend on their own. Some times those organizations can bring the rule of law into play to prevent folks from destroying irreplacable things. When the government forces people to handle their private property in a certain way, that troubles me greatly. But such things are far less common than you'd believe. MUCH more is irretrivably lost than is ever saved.

In this case, we're not talking about coersion, or any claims of authority over what a person does with their belongings. We simply want to educate and enlighten. If we do it so ham-fistedly that we insult them, then we've failed our goals. If they are too stubborn and closed minded to listen to friendly voices of advice, that's just too bad.

But to suggest that offering advice -- and HELPING our friends and aquaintances to a greater appreciation of the treasures they own -- is contrary to the "spirit of this country" is way out of line.

-Sam
 
Worrying more about preserving the relics of the Soviet past than preserving the crumbling foundations of America's future is a sickness.
Click to expand...

So ... if you'd seek to advance the preservation of historic artifacts (from all parts of the world) then you're actively working to undermine America's future? Surely your enthusiasm for the hyperbole with which you're entertaining us has stolen the logic out from under your argument!

The innovation and small-scale striving to invent and develop things has not left our culture! The successful innovators that seem to pepper our recollections of history were ALWAYS a precious few bright sparks among the masses who just strugged day-to-day to draw a paycheck. I'd wager the vast increases in disposable wealth in the last four or five decades have greatly expanded the numbers of brave (and/or crazy) inventers and tinkerers over anything the 19th or early 20th centuries could have mustered.

Just because the innovation of today might look a bit different -- and branch into tech sectors that us old-school wood & iron guys don't quite comprehend -- doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And just because some of us would suggest that there are better avenues for innovation than unenlightened destruction of historic artifacts, doesn't mean we stand in the way of individual initiative and contributions to progress.

-Sam
 
I have no problem with those who want to keep THEIR mil-surps all original(I have some kept that way too). I seriously doubt that MOST sporterized mil-surps were ever involved in anything historic. A GEW.98 made after 1918 probably never saw any warfare as neither did a Yugo 1948(small non-world changing scirmishes don't count) nor tons of SMLEs. So a sporterized Mauser isn't (necessarily)history being cut up. I have a hard time when I put together a Mauser 98 from a stripped receiver with non-military parts,sporter barrel,adjustable trigger,aftermarket trigger guard/magazine,Parker Hale commercial bolt and internals and the first thing someone says is "Yeah,it's nice but I wish you hadn't BUBBA'ed it "??????
 
I have a hard time when I put together a Mauser 98 from a stripped receiver with non-military parts,sporter barrel,adjustable trigger,aftermarket trigger guard/magazine,Parker Hale commercial bolt and internals and the first thing someone says is "Yeah,it's nice but I wish you hadn't BUBBA'ed it "??????
Click to expand...
Does that actually happen to you a lot? I mean, you explain that you're pulling together unassembled parts to make something you want and people give you grief because you didn't build a replica of the original pattern gun? If so, that's kind of sad. I'd have a hard time taking their complaint seriously, too.

On the other hand, I don't think that a weapon had to actually be used in a "significant" battle somewhere to be considered a valuable historic artifact. If you do have a parts-matching K98 or SMLE from whenever, you don't have to check it's provenance and battle record to find out whether or not it should be cut up. (Of course, valid records of use may INCREASE it's value...)

As you kind of alluded to, there are many tens of thousands of already chopped "sporterized" guns out there for very little money if you've got an itchy hacksaw finger. Or, as you did, just contact any of the supply houses that stock stripped receivers and such parts.

That's part of what I'm getting at with the "education" and "enlightenment" comments. There are ways to do this which are both less destructive to the dwindling numbers of pristine original artifacts -- AND -- easier and cheaper for the builders. We can help both causes by sharing that information.

-Sam
 
I understand your points Sam1911 and largely agree with you. I don't usually tell someone right off the bat that my sporters were built from left over gun parts. They seem to automatically assume that I cut up a valuable piece if history. As for mil-surps monetary value (which is only a concern for a buyer or seller) a K98 used in the battle of Stalingrad or a Garand used at Bastone is certain more prized by collectors than a Colombian 1950 M98(my personal favorite) just as an Indian arrowhead picked up at Little Bighorn is going to be more prized than an identical arrowhead picked up from a cottonfield in Alabama. Also note that Mil-surps in pristine condition likely saw little or no use in actual battle hence the excellent condition. Each person should try to please themselves in their firearms collecting and not worry about what others are doing with their's.
 
Treasure and Trash:

I spend my days on a 110 square mile graveyard. It says Naval Surface Warfare Center at the gates, but we, the grave diggers, know better. Some 4000 magazines here (bunkers are for Army folk, Navy folk call them magazines). Once upon a time, we made things here, stored them a while, them sent them out to be used. Still do some of that, but only a piddlin' amount.

Nowadays, we keep a good number of magazines turned over (empty, or ready to be emptied). Always getting rail car loads or truck loads of this or that. The Navy does not use it anymore, but can't quite part with it just yet. Keep it around as spare, or parts, or reserve. Scrap or DRMO it in a few years.

About 15 years back, we had a Garand problems. 2 dozen magazines full of them, and the CMP was not calling us very often. So we studied the problem, and came up with a solution, a program, a plan. Remove them from storage. Clean and degrease in an environmentally sound way. Disassemble them; send the wood to a local furniture manufacturer who would grind it and use it to make fake wood. Chop the rest, put it in rail cars, and send it to a foundry to be made into auto steel.

Bubba was thwarted; so were the collectors.
 
Mr Pale Horse,what can I say? I'm sick. As my grand daughter would say,"my heart hurts". Excuse me now as I go..do something else.....anything else...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
New Mosin Nagant! Mod (sporter questions)
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
Sam1911
S
S
  • Locked
Hungarian M44 Nagant Question
Replies
4
Views
638
ajax
A
G
  • Locked
03A3 sporter
Replies
16
Views
2K
rustymaggot
R
M
  • Locked
Improving accuracy of sporter type rifles?
Replies
12
Views
864
rangerruck
R
HB
  • Locked
Which sporter?
Replies
4
Views
469
Maverick223
Maverick223
Back
Top