Things to consider when buying a 91/30

[D-BOMB]

Hi all,

I am thinking of picking up a 91/30 just because they are cheap haha. I have the opportunity to hand pick (via photos) and I was wondering if the production year reflects the quality, for example would a late 30's production be of better quality then a later wartime production.

Also any other suggestions you can give me would be great!

thanks in advance

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Amsdorf]

It is has a clean bore, decent rifling, I don't really think it matter much when you are only spending $100 bucks or so. My .02.

[fernleaf]

A lot of the 1941, 42, and 43 made rifles show the rougher wartime standard of manufacture, but they are still just as strong and serviceable as earlier dated examples.

There are no years or manufacturers that are considered any 'better' than others, but Tula made rifles seem to attract interest probably because they made less rifles than Izhevsk...

[Aragorn243]

Depends what you're after. All were more than likely used in WWII but only a few years were produced in WWII. Appearance, any prewar is going to have a nicer finish to the metal work. The stocks will most likely be about the same condition although some have a better fit around the rear of the receiver than others.

Tula is generally preferred because it was the primary arsenal of the Soviets and is felt by some that the product produced is of a better grade. WWII production Tulas are much less common as the factory was overrun by the Germans and the equipment moved east. Pre-war Tula's are more common than Ishevsk.

A WWII production rifle with a smooth finish may be an ex-sniper. These were in general finished to a better degree, can tell the difference by examining he interior of the receiver and looking for screw ends showing where they were inserted into the holes and then ground down prior to refinishing.

Ex-sniper, hex receiver and laminated stocks all get a slight premium over others. Bayonets should have matching numbers to the rifle but rarely do because the seller doesn't take the time to look at them before shipping, you can ask him to check. They are shipped with the rifles but loose in the crate and they usually just grab one without checking numbers.

Handguards with brass fittings look sharp compared to those with black steel. Stock dog collar holes come in several varieties, no metal insert, partial metal insert, full metal guide and full metal guide held by screws. The ones with the screws are the oldest, the full metal guides are generally on better finished stocks.

Four numbers on the rifle should match, bolt, butt plate, receiver and magazine base plate. Bayonet as well as noted above but not often considered as necessary. Some will be force matched with a previous number lined out and the new one next to it. These would be less desirable.

For function, all will work about the same, all are very efficient, it is a simple design and they are nearly indestructible. For appearance, the earlier the better. I have never seen a re-arsenaled 91/30 with a bad bore but some are better than others, hard to get that off a photo though.

[D-BOMB]

Thanks for all your help guys, I ordered a very nice looking 39' Ishevck. I will update this thread with pics when in arrives.

[D-BOMB]

Well it came last week so I guess I should post up some pics.











And the Family shot...


Ive gotta say its a pretty cool peice of history for $110.

[Aragorn243]

From what I can see it looks like a good one. Full metal guards for the dog collars and brass fittings on the hand guard. Should clean up real nice. You should disassemble it completely to get the cosmoline off and out of it. They look like they wiped down the outside but the inside is going to be a mess, including the interior of the stock. If you want to leave the original finish on the stock, just wipe it down with clean rags but for the metal you may want to use a gun oil to break it up a bit. I'd clean the bore before firing too.

Ammo is pretty cheap for these right now, just do a search and you should come up with several online sellers. I just ordered some for $66 a tin of 440 rounds the other day, 1970's Russian manufacture. That's about $20 a tin less than I paid a year ago for similar stuff. You can't reload it which is a drawback but for plinking, it's hard to beat.

[Chumlee Bumsnag]

Here are a couple of photos that clearly show the difference in manufacturing quality you can expect to see in Mosin 91/30's. The nice one is from a 1936 Tula hex receiver with matching numbers, including bayo. The rough one is from a 1944 Izhevsk ex-sniper, also matching numbers.

[D-BOMB]

Oh wow that is quite the differance in quality, I had a few more pics but they didnt show up for some reason so I'll attempt to repost tonight.

Man sometimes I wish I lived south of the border, the cheapest I can find a 440 tin shipped for up here is $170!

[Aragorn243]

My ammo came yesterday in a wooden crate. Two tins with the much wanted can opener. No more hammer and chisel for me. Shipping bumped it up a bit but with shipping the two tins of 440 were $157.00. Only took three days to get here so it must have been close.

I never thought to compare my bayonets. Only one is matching. Three of mine are pre-war, the fourth is an ex-sniper so it's quality is better than your average war rifle. It's why I selected it, didn't realize it was an ex-sniper until I brought it home and noticed the holes on the inside of the receiver.