In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Darn things can shoot!
bpost
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..[;)]
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..[;)]
Comments
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.)
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.
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.