In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Darn things can shoot!

bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,395 ✭✭✭✭
I have two MN 91-30's one a 1942 the other a 1939. This was the first attempt to see if one could out-shoot the other

I loaded 180 Speer 308 diameter bullets in new cases pushed by 47.5 grains of IMR 4350. It is a very mild load listed as a good un' in the load manual, it was.

The target was 4X4 black electrical tape on cardboard at 100 yards issue iron sights, aging eyes. I shot ten shot groups to see which gun shot best. I would load a round, close the bolt lay it across the rest and try to squeeze the mushy thing they call and excuse for a trigger.

The 1942 shot a group of all ten cover-able by a coffee cup with seven in a 2" group! The group was about 10" above the point of aim.

The 1939 had about a 6" pattern not a group, I think the trigger might be an issue with it since it feels HORRID at best, or perhaps the bore diameter is way too big, who knows.

The second load was 50 grains IMR 3450 with the same 180 bullet. Dang if the 1942 did not ring the 200 yard plate 7 out of 10 shots off hand. I think I'll keep the 1942 as a possible deer gun and reserve the 1939 to a blasting plinker for cast bullets and nostalgia.

I am impressed with a rifle that cheap ($69 bucks), that old and rough finished can still shoot that well. Maybe the Russians were on to something..[;)]


  • PA ShootistPA Shootist Member Posts: 676 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have shot my Mosin rifles a lot, including in some local bolt-gun matches over the years, and once at Camp Perry, and have done a bit better with larger-diameter bullets. My bores have slugged from .310 to .312. .312 bullets intended for .303 British seem to do the best me. All assuming good bores, but one of mine, a 1942 Izzy 91/30 looks rough but shoots fine.
  • hobo9650hobo9650 Member Posts: 2,760 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Try both with and without the bayonet. I think you will see an improvement with the bayo on.

    I have about a dozen of them and everyone I have tested does better with the bayo on. (barrel tends to heat up and bend slightly.)
  • brechtbrecht Member Posts: 305 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Mn uses .311 bullets not 308
  • machine gun moranmachine gun moran Member Posts: 5,198
    edited November -1
    From what I've read on the '' website, Russian infantrymen considered stock 91/30's to be 800-yard guns.

    When Mosin sights were being regulated at the factories, anything that would shoot into 1 MOA was sidelined as a sniper rifle candidate. There were a lot of them, as the Russians actually produced about 250,000 sniper 91/30's. The Russian sniper targeting standards were a little different, as the rifles were required to hold something less than 1 MOA horizontally, but a little more than 1 MOA was allowed vertically.

    Besides being accurate, the Russians liked the Mosin's reliability. They agreed that when battlefield conditions were at their absolute worst, the Mosins were the last thing on either side that was still working.
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,395 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by brecht
    Mn uses .311 bullets not 308

    It depends on the bore, the Russian war production variances allowed were somewhere between "its got a hole in it so its good enough on the small side to it still goes BANG so ship it".

    Some shoot 308 diameter bullets just fine, I happen to have one that does. For that I am happy. [^]

    I imagine the other gun needs the 311 bullets or even larger. Someday I'll slug the bore to find out.
Sign In or Register to comment.