[rtch77]

I am jumping ahead here. Bought a Mosin Nagant, New England, Westinghouse type long rifle a month ago. The tag marked it "Finland" The action seems smooth enough, cleaned the bore, (It was disgusting) removed the last of the preservative I found. Haven't fired it yet.

OK Questions:

Now Literature says weapon fires more accurate with bayonet attached (does not have one), also does cleaning rod presence have any effect on accuracy/zeroing? I took it out to shave a little weight, besides its useless as an actual cleaning rod. Just thinking this weapon would feel great on a bipod, in a pop-up deer blind.

[DWARREN123]

The bayonet may or may not affect the accuracy of the rifle. The cleaning rod should not.
Fire it first and see what it does. A lot of times the way the stock touches the action and barrel can cause problems.
But first shoot it and see and these are not target rifles so 2-3 inches at 100 yards is about standard for a good one.

[just_a_car]

I have never heard of the Mosins firing more accurately with a bayo attached. I have heard (and witnessed) a Mosin Nagant M44 shoot more accurately with the folding bayonet extended.

Since I'm guessing what you have there is a M91/30 or similar, then you'll be better off just drifting the front sight to "zero" after firing. Likely, you won't have to, especially if the line on the front of the sight is lined-up with line on the front of the sight block.

[troy2000]

My first 91/30 was sighted for the bayonet; taking it off made a noticeable difference at 100 yards. Supposedly the Russian troops weren't even issued sheaths or frogs for their bayonets, because they were expected to keep them permanently attached, and theirs were generally sighted in with bayonet attached (or extended, in the case of M44's).

If you're sure yours was used by the Finns, they would've sighted it in without a bayonet; they generally didn't even issue them. Their troops preferred puukka knives for close work.