surplus rifles.
safety of design
recoil
usefulness of the cartridge
cost of reloading
cost of factory new ammunition
longevity of the gun itself.
Printable View
surplus rifles.
safety of design
recoil
usefulness of the cartridge
cost of reloading
cost of factory new ammunition
longevity of the gun itself.
Sorry to high-jack your thread, but are we talking military rifles that have been recently surplussed because they are no longer useful, or are we talking old military rifles in general?
in general pre Korean war military rifles and even civilian ones based on them.
That being the case, you will have to include the categories of condition, scarcity, and collectability, or am I still missing the purpose of this exercise?
I don't collect military rifles as such - my interests are with sporting rifles. Many truly excellent sporting rifles are based upon actions designed for military use, and some civilian designed rifles have been adopted and modified for military use. That being said, I like accurate military based target rifles, and military rifles of special interest such as Canadian marked rifles.
I understand that there is even a category of military firearm collectors that collect "ethical" military weapons: never been used to kill/never issued.
If I get it right, I’d vote for an M96 Swedish Mauser.
Great rifle, great action, great and cheap ammo.
Reloading is simple and can be also very cheap with the right components. Factory ammo is available everywhere and can be cheap too.
Unfortunately a “neutral” gat, but still great.
I agree, the M96 Swedish Mauser combined with the 6.5x55 Swede swing well above their weight.
yet how would you put the pre model 98 gas venting system into the M96 swede?
Sorry, I did not understand this question.
The M96 is adequate for the ammo it uses. Doesn’t seem to be any problem with safety.
Or do you mean something else?
gas venting through the bolt issue. although MOST current production rifles have the same intrinsic issue of using the firing pin hole in the bolt to vent gas from a ruptured case or primer directly into the shooters face some have in the pastpointed out the model 96 may be more dangerous from itQuote:
Originally Posted by Ovidio
I need to take a look at the rifle...can’t recall exactly, but I think it is very similar to the K98, with big gas ports in the body of the bolt.
its all screwy in the end, strength and all as I have held worn out surplus rifles that were still better made then SOME current production rifles I have held at the gun store.
I guess when a rusted out m1 carbine or enfield has better build quality then a brand new Mossberg bolt action, undustry sucks
Too many unknowns to comment sensibly. Just about all the military rifles will meet the criteria, based on subjective opinions.
My preference to meet all these criteria would be LE no 1 MkIII* or No 4 Mk2. Followed by FAL. Fired many thousands [literally] of rounds in all three. Battle proven. Followed by AK47. Fired no rounds but the rest applies.
M1 Garand and M1 carbine
They cover all of the bases,have a history of major success and there are enough variations and markings on them to make them fun for collectors to seek, obtain and research.
K31, fast, extremely accurate, very powerful, very durable, well balanced, manageable recoil.
I got curious my own self. The porting on my K98 bolts is considerably more generous and it has the beefy shroud the Swede lacks. Not giving up my Swedes though. Not like I look like Brad Pitt anyway. :rolleyes:
the model 96 bolt looks a lot like the enfield from the rear, feels like somebody was copying somebody elses toys.
Thanks. I’m on holidays and far from the rifles...Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Thraxx
Well I think I've got some plausible answers. The trouble is, I haven't yet understood just what the question is. Too many aspects all jumbled together. But I reckon that most of my rifles, having past their first century or so, will still be banging away safely when none of us are around to worry about it.
:rofl: I glad its not just me then that read the OP in utter confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick
Depends on what your goal is. If it is shooting, the two main factors would be the cost of ammo/reloading and condition of the rifle. Possibly amount of recoil. Possibly cost of the rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketshaver
If its collectability, it depends on what your goal to is to collect. Personally my current goal is a action type collection featuring as many different actions as possible as I love the mechanical history and function of them.
Others might collect based off certain wars/countries (WWII being a obvious one for many). Plenty of reasons to collect all dependent on what you want.
Safety of design isn't really a factor for collecting purposes, only shooting purposes. For example I would not shoot a Vetterli 70/87/15 but I will shoot most other military rifles in serviceable condition. However for longevity your not going to find as many long lived service wise as them.
safety and shootability. to get a modern produced rifle fixed up close to a military surplus set up rifle, is going to cost as much as a shooter grade 03a2. Lot of shooter grade surplus rifles out there, but its hard to figure out the right one.
Sure a worn out enfield can be fun, but getting that burnt out barrel replaced going to cost more then the gun is worth. Carcano carbines at buds seem nice, but that short barrel gives me the willies.
Getting the best bang for your buck is a tough one.
Its O.K. to ask for advice or other opinions, but when you get down to it, nobody can pick out your fishing rod for you. Otherwise, we would all be dating/married to the same girl.
I've always thought that the Israeli Mauser K98ks converted to 7.62 NATO or the Mauser 95/1916 7.62 NATO conversion would be a great all round gun - when they could be purchased at a reasonable price. A Kongsberg M59F1 wasn't even in the picture.
Tough durable rifles with ammunition available everywhere. However, I REALLY disliked the 7.62 stamped on the receiver ring. It was like punching a pretty girl in the nose.
Safety wise, most milsurps in good condition are pretty safe to shoot provided your not going beyond what was expected of the rifle in the first place. Certain rifles you need to take more care with, such as Gewehr 88s which can have a variety of factors that can make them less safe if you don't know what your doing.
For shooting, common ammo rifles which don't cost a small fortune are things like Israeli K98ks or other M98 Mausers that were converted to 7.62 NATO (tons of countries did this conversion as it just involved replacing the barrel, ex. Chilean M1912s etc.), Ishapore 2A1 Lee Enfields in 7.62 NATO, Brazilan Mausers in .30-06, Mexican Mausers in .30-06, Swedish Mausers are a great buy (M38s are better for the shooter because of the lower minimum sight setting) thought the 6.5 ammo is more expensive, Finnish Mosins can be a lot of fun (the better shooting variants being the M28/30 and M39) and the ammo is fairly cheap, K31s are excellent shooters and if you find the ammo at the right price a steal of a deal the other Swiss Straight pull designs are also fun but have 300m minimum rear sight settings.
Lee Enfields can be good but the ammo is more expensive and you have to be a bit careful with them (at least in Canada, we have a cottage industry 'restoring' sporters and many are shoddily done). If you wanted to go the .303 route a P14 is a better choice for being a shooter, and the M1917 is also a great choice as well being in .30-06. Arisaka Type 99s are also excellent shooters and usually have VG+ bores, very easy to reload for but commercial ammo is difficult. You could also go any number of Mausers in 8mm, but ammo costs are higher. French Berthiers are also a ton of fun, and if the bore is in VG+ condition exceptionally accurate. They are easy to reload for, but can be expensive if your buying factory ammo.
I still vote for the Swedes.
Or, alternatively, for a Brazilian in 7x57.
Inexpensive to reload and very accurate.
Actually, that might very well be my preferred rifle.
But I like them all, actually...
I also feel a tad guilty that I didn’t mention the Mosin...
You've got to love the classics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovidio
I do... I do
But also my no. 1 mk3* would be great:D
Geez. Brigitte Bardot or Sophia Loren? Tough call here, but pass on Pelosi. Sorry, guys.
the definition of good condition is different here on this forum, then it is at online retailers like Classic, JG sales, or even on gun broker, where a revolver with a seller rating of "nra good to very good" can mean "bulged and split barrel, with cracked frame at forcing cone." And no one wants to take a return if you cant travel from say Kentucky to Oregon to return it in person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eaglelord17
Always liked the look of the K31 and other swiss rifles, but I can never find the ammunition that matches the rifles that DO show up for sale online.
I do like the look of the swedes, and the cartridge is perhaps the only caliber starting with a 6 that is, or will be worth buying.
Those retailers aren't using proper NRA standards then and they have to return it or they can be sued for fraud. When it is something like the bluing is 70% when it is advertised as 75%, good luck. But when the barrel is bulged or split and it was advertised as VG, you have a clear case to get refunded.Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketshaver
Personally when I sell I always disclose any flaws I can think of to the buyer. I have never had anyone ask for it to be returned as they knew exactly what they were buying. Being in the USA I would just go to gunshows if condition is a concern. I have only been to one in the States and I was blown away by the variety available.