which is a "better" mosin nagant?

Niko911 · 06-20-2008, 02:44 PM

I have a 1948 m44 Izhevsk mosin nagant. when i bought it the thing looked brand spanking new and ive put about 200 rounds through it and man its accurate as can be. now is the Tula a better/more rare than the Izhevsk??

LefthandShooter · 06-20-2008, 02:58 PM

As for better I do not know. I only know I love both my M44 and 91/30 (don't remember the arsenal name). I know they are better because they are mine and I can't afford the better ones. I just plink and target with them so they are just fine for me!

livebythegun · 06-20-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niko911

I have a 1948 m44 Izhevsk mosin nagant. when i bought it the thing looked brand spanking new and ive put about 200 rounds through it and man its accurate as can be. now is the Tula a better/more rare than the Izhevsk??

Guns from the Tula arsenal are definitely more sought after.

just_a_car · 06-20-2008, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by livebythegun

Guns from the Tula arsenal are definitely more sought after.

It's only more sought after because they made less of them, thus are more rare, not necessarily a "better" arsenal make than Izzy.

Kismet · 06-20-2008, 04:08 PM

Neat thing is, you get to decide "better."

livebythegun · 06-20-2008, 04:13 PM

[quote=just_a_car;541577]It's only more sought after because they made less of them, thus are more rare, not necessarily a "better" arsenal make than Izzy.[/quote Never said they were better just more sought after.

gandog56 · 06-20-2008, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kismet

Neat thing is, you get to decide "better."

Neater thing is if it puts 'em where I aim's 'em, I don't care where it came from.

Geo M44 · 06-20-2008, 05:11 PM

The quality of the rifle is more dependant on when they were made, rather than where, as durring the heat of the war years 1942 to mid 1945, not only were they cranking rifles out at as fast as possible, but materials were running short, and they had to improvise, hense the plywood ("laminated") stocks, 2 and 3 piece spliced stocks, and 91/30 Hex and Round receivers mated to M44 barrels.

The M44 replaced the almost identical M38 in 1944 to include a non missplaceable attached bayonet,with early prototypes in 1943 coming from Izhevsk. The Tula arsenal only made about 50,000 M44's in 1944 and then was retooled for something else, and they are moderately rare. So almost all of the 14 million M44's were made in Izhevsk.

sean46953 · 06-20-2008, 06:02 PM

Tula Mosins in general are a little more sought after than the Izzys. Thats cause Hitler's operation Barbosa (the invasion of Russia) Put the front lines just a few miles away from the Tula Arsena so it was closed for a few years...like 41 to 43? S most of the war time Mosins were made at the Izzy asenal. I agree that the arsenal matters in the way of quality, just the years of manufacture.

Iron_Colonel · 06-20-2008, 06:17 PM

I have a 1946 M44 from the Izzy arsenal. The quality looks really good and smooth, compared to my 1942 re-arsenaled 91/30. As far as quality goes, post war I would imagine are a little bit better. I guess you never know how one shoots until its shot post war or not.

My 91/30 I am a little disappointed with, I was young and dumb and it was about $100 so I bought one. I looked through the pile at the gun show. I don't remember what my deciding factors were in buying it. Maybe it was the stock thats laminated. I can't recall, but its mis-matched, and the bolt isn't as smooth as I would prefer. Owell I guess, maybe some day I'll pick up a nicer one with my C&R.

Niko911 · 06-21-2008, 05:39 PM

see i figured war time mosins wouldnt be as quality as postwar thats why i bought a 1948 m44, was just wondering because i figure ill buy another mosin nagant before the prices go up again and the junk ones start coming out

Alex1989 · 06-26-2008, 01:47 AM

I would imagine that a 91/30 is more accurate then the carbines due to longer barrel I mean hell they were very successful sinper rifles. I own an izzy 1943 91/30 its beautiful with a solid action, haven't shot it yet because I am still inspecting it and still need to know exactly how to clean it right.

I wouldn't say that the war productions are less quality, but lets just say they are simplified. my mosin is missing the brass rings around the sling slabs (indicates that it was send directly to the front) and the right side of my rear receiver isn't machined. and of course it has a round receiver and a high wall.

I was going to buy a 1939 Mosin but went with the war production one because those wartime accelerated production features appealed to me. It was made during a time of struggle and great adversity as at that time the russians were in deep shit. It just seemed to be more unique but less sought after.

anyhow that is just my 2 cents

06-20-2008, 02:44 PM	#1
Niko911 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 116 Trader Rating: (0)	which is a "better" mosin nagant? I have a 1948 m44 Izhevsk mosin nagant. when i bought it the thing looked brand spanking new and ive put about 200 rounds through it and man its accurate as can be. now is the Tula a better/more rare than the Izhevsk??

06-20-2008, 04:08 PM	#5
Kismet Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: rural WI Posts: 144 Trader Rating: (0)	Neat thing is, you get to decide "better." __________________ Kis Safety? SAFETY??? Is gun for to shoot, not to be on SAFETY!!!

06-20-2008, 05:11 PM	#8
Geo M44 Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: The Desert Posts: 2,031 Trader Rating: (0)	The quality of the rifle is more dependant on when they were made, rather than where, as durring the heat of the war years 1942 to mid 1945, not only were they cranking rifles out at as fast as possible, but materials were running short, and they had to improvise, hense the plywood ("laminated") stocks, 2 and 3 piece spliced stocks, and 91/30 Hex and Round receivers mated to M44 barrels. The M44 replaced the almost identical M38 in 1944 to include a non missplaceable attached bayonet,with early prototypes in 1943 coming from Izhevsk. The Tula arsenal only made about 50,000 M44's in 1944 and then was retooled for something else, and they are moderately rare. So almost all of the 14 million M44's were made in Izhevsk. __________________ Remember when seconds count... the police are only minutes away.

06-20-2008, 06:02 PM	#9
sean46953 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Marion, Indiana Posts: 357 Trader Rating: (0)	Tula Mosins in general are a little more sought after than the Izzys. Thats cause Hitler's operation Barbosa (the invasion of Russia) Put the front lines just a few miles away from the Tula Arsena so it was closed for a few years...like 41 to 43? S most of the war time Mosins were made at the Izzy asenal. I agree that the arsenal matters in the way of quality, just the years of manufacture. __________________ http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/b...00_0535100.jpgSean M. Hartman

06-20-2008, 06:17 PM	#10
Iron_Colonel Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Washington St. Posts: 301 Trader Rating: (0)	I have a 1946 M44 from the Izzy arsenal. The quality looks really good and smooth, compared to my 1942 re-arsenaled 91/30. As far as quality goes, post war I would imagine are a little bit better. I guess you never know how one shoots until its shot post war or not. My 91/30 I am a little disappointed with, I was young and dumb and it was about $100 so I bought one. I looked through the pile at the gun show. I don't remember what my deciding factors were in buying it. Maybe it was the stock thats laminated. I can't recall, but its mis-matched, and the bolt isn't as smooth as I would prefer. Owell I guess, maybe some day I'll pick up a nicer one with my C&R. __________________ Go Seahawks.

06-20-2008, 02:58 PM	#2
LefthandShooter Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: In A House in NE Ohio! Posts: 1,204 Trader Rating: (0)	As for better I do not know. I only know I love both my M44 and 91/30 (don't remember the arsenal name). I know they are better because they are mine and I can't afford the better ones. I just plink and target with them so they are just fine for me!

06-20-2008, 04:13 PM	#6
livebythegun Banned Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 127 Trader Rating: (0)	[quote=just_a_car;541577]It's only more sought after because they made less of them, thus are more rare, not necessarily a "better" arsenal make than Izzy.[/quote Never said they were better just more sought after.

06-21-2008, 05:39 PM	#11
Niko911 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 116 Trader Rating: (0)	see i figured war time mosins wouldnt be as quality as postwar thats why i bought a 1948 m44, was just wondering because i figure ill buy another mosin nagant before the prices go up again and the junk ones start coming out

06-26-2008, 01:47 AM	#12
Alex1989 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Detroit Posts: 3 Trader Rating: (0)	I would imagine that a 91/30 is more accurate then the carbines due to longer barrel I mean hell they were very successful sinper rifles. I own an izzy 1943 91/30 its beautiful with a solid action, haven't shot it yet because I am still inspecting it and still need to know exactly how to clean it right. I wouldn't say that the war productions are less quality, but lets just say they are simplified. my mosin is missing the brass rings around the sling slabs (indicates that it was send directly to the front) and the right side of my rear receiver isn't machined. and of course it has a round receiver and a high wall. I was going to buy a 1939 Mosin but went with the war production one because those wartime accelerated production features appealed to me. It was made during a time of struggle and great adversity as at that time the russians were in deep shit. It just seemed to be more unique but less sought after. anyhow that is just my 2 cents