Saturday, August 8, 2009

Praxis: The Whys and Wherefores of My Interest in Mosin Nagants as Resistance Rifles.

Chinese Type 53 Carbines

tom has taken me to task in two comments on my post "Praxis: Tactical Packing the 7.62x54R, etc."

Here is one:

...As to Logistics, what are the plans?


Say you narrow the list to common chamberings:

7.62 NATO
8mm and 7mm Mauser
6.5 Grendel
6.8 SPC
.30 Carbine
.50 BMG
Misc. Lapuas
.30-30 and .45-70
.300 WinnieMag
Misc. CheyTacs
5.8x42 ChiCom

Let people mix it all up!





I'm really quite puzzled.
Seems defeatist.

Anybody care to 'splain it to me?

Here is the other.











Tactics are important.
Strategy is important.
Timing is important. LOGISTICS WIN WARS.




Let me 'splain

In the interest of complete discussion, I am going to respond to these ad seriatim.

Tom asks first: "As to Logistics, what are the plans? Gonna go with 'run what you brung' and let each individual decide and have platoons that have no ammo commonality?"

Tom, much like the 90s, if you can find a bunch of folks who have standardized on a caliber or a platform, or even a combination of calibers and platforms, this will put them above the average group's learning curve/resources. If you haven't noticed, one of the drums I beat regularly on Sipsey Street is logistics. But one other thing I learned from the 90s, you might call it Militia Leader's Rule No. 1: You work with what you have and build on that.

Tom then lists the variety of calibers that will likely show up when the ball opens, and comments, "Looks like a logistical hell to me." Of course it is.

Then he suggests the folly of throwing "more money at the Antiques, that shoot minute of torso on a good day, than it would cost to buy a nice off the shelf modern bolt or semi rifle of common usage and many the spare parts available for a hundred bucks more."

Well, you certainly have a point, but it is mooted by several factors. Let me explain. During the 90s, everybody wanted an AR in 5.56 or 7.62 NATO battle rifle. Problem was, few of the folks who were willing to organize and train had the resources to buy those systems after the AWB ran the prices up. They bought SKS's instead, for about the same money that you can buy a Mosin Nagant today, AND FOR THE SAME REASON. It is what they can afford. Ours has always been a movement short on resources, and also one that is mobilized almost entirely by events. So folks have always shown up, short on ammo and lacking a complete understanding of what they need to accomplish the job of getting ready to resist a predatory government.

Now, we can bemoan this fact, or we can plan around it. There are folks who can only afford a M-N, just as there were folks in the 90s who could only afford an SKS. It is what they have, so we teach them to make do and become the best they can with what they have.

This is not altogether a bad thing. There are many possible scenarios that threaten our lives, property and liberty and that of our communities. In some of these, a cheap rifle that can be used and dumped without great loss is a tool that assumes greater value simply because it IS cheap. There are many, many M-N variants in this country at the moment and many of those are not yellow-sheeted. They are anonymous, fungible and darn useful in a pinch.

Secondly, think of them as a long-gun version of the Liberator pistol. While they are cheap, they are not the best weapon, but they are certainly capable of harvesting another, better weapon, one that is in a NATO standard caliber. I'm certain that some of the fastest sprints in a post-Lexington Green world will be those made to get down to the kill zone to strip the best weapons from newly dead Hessians before their buddies can do the same.

And again, these "beaters" are out there already in the hands of men and women who are willing to use them. It is better to have a second-rate firearm and a first-rate will to use it than vice versa.

Then Tom said, "It really shocked me when on my 22mm muzzle brake/launcher poll, clicking occurred on the 'would be willing to spend more than 100 dollars to have such an item' button for 70 dollar rifles."

The value of a grenade launcher attachment capable of being used on a M-N type weapon is actually an incalculable positive.

This is my thinking, and tell me if I'm wrong. If there are a million or so M-N rifles out there, what does it matter if they are so inherently inaccurate that they cannot hit the broad side of barn WITH A BULLET at 300 meters? With a rifle grenade, they can hit the target at the same range close enough to win everytime. "Close" counts in atomic weapons, horseshoes and grenades, both hand and rifle.

Now, I have a Spanish Mauser FR-8 for my primary RG launching platform when I play around with inerts. I also have a Yugo 59/66 SKS and an M14S with M76 launcher attachment. The FR-8 I picked up back when they were very available and cheap (15 years ago). All of these today cost a bunch more money than a Mosin Nagant of any variant. Indeed, why would you want to use an expensive rifle to sling a RG when a cheap one will do the same job? And remember, if you have to "dump arms" as the IRA calls it, are you going to miss that $1000 rifle a lot more than an $89 one? You bet you are.

Finally, in the first reply, Tom concludes with:

I'm going to keep beating this one like a soon to be dead horse until somebody explains the appeal of preparing to fail. Is it that they are super cheap compared to other things so more people will have rifles? A ploy to increase numbers for people that have chosen not to budget for a proper battle rifle and want to buy one dirt cheap even if it's not a particularly nice thing to own or shoot or do battle with? I'm really quite puzzled. Seems defeatist. Anybody care to 'splain it to me?

Again, they are already out there in common usage. For some folks, they represent all the rifle they can afford. To try to make better use of what you have is not a "ploy," except perhaps in the positive sense. For those who cannot afford an AR or MBR, the M-N will still be enough to get them one later on. Now, as to your second reply:

Tom begins by observing that it is possible for Americans "to buy pretty much any firearms one might wish to own as well as ammunition of merit . . . We live in the most free country in the civilized western world regarding purchasing arms, armaments, ammo, and related kit. On the same tangent, you can go to a Walmart or your local gun shop and buy for not much more than the price of a nag, a proper modern rifle. What is the fetish with being penny wise and pound foolish?"

Again, it bears repeating that the M-N, especially in this climate of increasing unemployment, is all the rifle many can afford.

And Tom asks, "Is the idea to pick a 'Restoration War Fight' with intent to LOSE because of stupid logistical ideas?"

There are several things wrong with that statement, not the least of which is that no one who is on my side wants to pick a fight. The fight, if and when it comes, had bloody well better come to us unwanted by our side. As far as "stupid logistical ideas" as they relate to the ubiquity of the Mosin Nagant, no one I know planned for popularity of these inexpensive rifles, we are just trying to make the greatest advantage out of what is already there.

No one with half-a-brain expects to keep all the various and miscellaneous types and calibers of arms shooting past the first, say, six months of any civil conflict and it will probably be a lot less. Look again to the experience of Viet Cong logistics.

The VC began the "resistance war against the lackey running dogs" of Diem with whatever they could beg, borrow or steal. Mostly that meant leftovers and castoffs from WWII and the war against the French colonialists and whatever they could buy from the corrupt ARVN authorities or steal from the government's regional and district forces. Even when a weapon broke down, it was fixed in jungle workshops. See the photo of the M-N which was restocked with wood from an M-1 Carbine in my first VC Logistics post.

But as the supply of weapons from outside the country increased, the main force VC were uniformly armed with ComBloc 7.62x39 and 7.62x54R weapons. Even then, the older mixmaster French, Japanese and obsolete US weapons were turned in to be reissued to village "self-defense" forces. Likely, that will be what happens in the next American civil war, may God forbid that it ever begins.

Yet whether we are ready or not, whether everyone is one the same page of standardization and logistics or not, all wars are fought on a "come as you are" basis. Always have been, always will be.

Take for example this excerpt from "Charge Both Ways": The Battle of Parker's Crossroads" by Steve A. Williams.

Nathan Bedford Forrest at Parker's Crossroads

During the last two months of 1862, Brigadier General Nathan Bedford Forrest . . . was tasked by General Braxton Bragg to prepare for an expedition across the Tennessee River into West Tennessee in order to hinder the Union lines of supply from Columbus, Kentucky through West Tennessee to General U.S. Grant at Oxford, Mississippi. On December 4th, Forrest took position with his brigade consisting of the 4th, 8th and 9th Tennessee Regiments and Russell's 4th Alabama. with Freeman's Battery, a force comprising approximately 2100 strong, at Columbia.

With these forces, which were armed mainly with shotguns and flintlock muskets, with only about ten rounds of caps for his shotguns and many of the muskets were flintless, he set out to accomplish his mission. . . He had also sent a "citizen" not otherwise identified, to Memphis (Note: Then under Federal occupation. -- MBV) for the purpose of procuring a supply of percussion caps for his weapons. By the morning of the 17th he had crossed all his men and equipment, sunk his flatboats in a secret place and the "citizen" had returned with some 50,000 percussion caps -- enough to last until more could be captured. . .

Forrest had been gone for more than a fortnight; had marched about twenty miles a day, nearly half the time in rain or snow; had fought one battle, and had numerous smaller engagements and skirmishes; killed, wounded and captured about 1400 of the Federal troops, including four colonels of regiments captured; had captured four pieces of artillery -- losing three afterward; destroyed much railroad and government property; cut Grant off from railroad communications with the North, so that rations and forage could not be issued in a regular way for some time, and together with Van Dorn, caused Grant to change his base from the interior of Mississippi and return to LaGrange and Grand Junction on the Memphis and Charleston railroad, besides preventing reinforcements from going to Rosecrans in front of Nashville.

All in all, this was perhaps one of Forrest's most remarkable campaigns, when the difficulties and the superior forces against him are taken into consideration. Starting with about 2100 men and picking up nearly 500 recruits, losing nearly five hundred in killed, wounded and captured, he recrossed the river with nearly his original number of men, all well armed and supplied with an abundance of captured ammunition, blankets, coffee and other supplies. Besides which he brought out more than 500 Enfield rifles and over 1800 blankets and knapsacks. Going in with seven pieces of artillery, he brought out six, one having exploded in battle.

Tom then observes, truly:

Tactics are important.
Strategy is important.
Timing is important. LOGISTICS WIN WARS.

Absolutely. Nathan Bedford Forrest would agree. So do I. Forrest made do with what he had. We must also make do with what we have.

I will pass over much of Tom's concluding remarks for there is truly little I think that we disagree on. However, he does say this:


It is precisely "backing them up by showing strength of determination" that is at the heart of my Mosin Nagant grenadier idea. If we can popularize the art of the rifle grenade among these millions of M-N owners who are already out there, this will introduce further the element of strategic uncertainty in the minds of the "gangster government." Surely most of them, if they have thought of it at all, think even less of the "Curio and Relic" Mosin Nagants out there. And there is much to be derisive about, I suppose.

But let some percentage of these M-Ns be tipped with legal flash suppressors that have a 22mm outer diameter and then let the instructions and specifications "for entertainment purposes only" of a simple but reliable improvised rifle grenade be posted for all to see by some otherwise disinterested party on the Internet, and that calculation shifts markedly.

That is the essence of credible deterrence, and I would much rather back these cowardly predators down by winning the war for their reasonable expectation of the collection of their pensions that goes on between their own ears every day than have to kill in righteous self defense even the most evil of them.

And here, after some preliminary consideration, is my idea.

Meet the FAL STG 58 flash suppressor.

They can be purchased on-line for as little as $15.00. Now, cut off the M-44 bayonet blade ONLY leaving the bayonet ring that slips into place over the muzzle. Weld onto the bayonet ring a simple threaded adapter for the STG flash suppressor to screw into. (I would prefer to do it without welding, but I am not smart enough to figure out an alternative.)

The flash suppressor/muzzle brake attachment itself will have to be bored out slightly to accomodate the .310 bullet of the 7.62x54R. Instructions involving using a steel rod down the barrel to ensure alignment while the welding takes place is simple enough. My bet is you can accomplish the whole thing for way under $50.00, if we can persude somebody to knock out the weld-on adapters which would be, after all, a little bit of threaded metal.

Thus modified, the supressor/brake/launcher then can be swung out of the way and rest next to the stock just like the bayonet presently does. When you are ready to deploy, it just swings up and clicks into place just like the bayonet. Or, if you prefer, the bayonet attachment point can be used to bolt into position a fixed adapter/STG58 front end attachment, which actually may be preferable now that I think about it. Want to restore the rifle to its original form? Just unbolt the booger and bolt back on the bayonet.

I hope my answers to Tom's challenge are satisfactory. I'm just pig-headed enough to believe I'm right, anyway.

If there is civil armed conflict in this country in the near future, it will be, as I said, a "come as you are" war. And like it or not, Mosin Nagants "are." The only question is, can we use them to the greatest extent possible. Preferably not to fight a war, but to prevent one.


The NLF propaganda photo that caused all the bother. VC grenadier with US pattern rifle grenade mounted on a Mosin Nagant M44 pattern carbine.


Parrothead Jeff said...

Great article, Mike! I've got an M44 and a 91/30 myself. I like the old guns and these were affordable.
The M44s aren't nearly as plentiful as they once were, but the 91/30s are still out there for $80 or so. I'd venture a guess that a flash suppressor/launcher might be fashioned from a bayonet nearly as easily for the 91/30s as it could be for an M44.
One thing I love about the Mosins is that ammo is still available and affordable. $80 for 440 rounds is a great deal in these times.
Thank you for what you do and keep up the great work!
PS - I can't wait to buy a copy of Absolved!!!

Anonymous said...

I can get those Stg58 flash hiders for $5 each. Might be a LOT cheaper than you think to do this project.

Johnny said...

If you have a viable design, get an example worked up and send it to CNC Warrior. He'll make it if you can convince him it will sell. A G/L that replaces the carbine bayonet would be neat. (And then a praxis article on turning spent 7.62x54R cases into G/L cartridges.)

Re calibre: .223 Saiga carbines are going for $350 inc shipping at present.

There are various ways of adapting them to take STANAG magazines (M16), the adaptor / conversion cost up to $100-$150.


But someone handy in the WECSOG can do it cheaper:

(Some Saiga don't need the trunnion modified and it is said all future Saiga US imports will have the dimple in the receiver seen in the military version, FWIW.)

Meantime they can be used with proprietary mags anyway. You can convert them into something close to a military configuration at your own pace at a variety of price points.

As for ammo, practice with .22LR and air gun for your marksmanship training (there are persistent rumours of a Saiga .22LR being on the way). The ammo for those is so much cheaper. Dry training drills, and field exercises, with your centrefire guns will accustom you to handling.

Weaver said...

I was expecting some type of reply by Mike and I think he covered most of my thoughts but here are a few more. Many folks already have their supply of "556 or 308" equipment and just like having a piece of history. Many others just see the sense in having an inexpensive training rifle that has some of the cheapest available ammo, allowing far more "practice" in shooting as well as gunsmithing. The "grenade" idea Mike has may very well be one of the things that restores our Constitution, all the way back to before 1968. That should be our goal and the only outcome we will accept if civil war does break out. No more penalizing law abiding citizens for crimes committed by thugs. No more private jets for thug senators and congresscritters. No more high taxes and sending our hard earned money to countries that hate our guts. No more career polititions. NO MORE, we have had enough. If they start a war there can be only one conclusion.


AvgJoe said...

The M44 or the 91/30 worked pretty good against the Germans. Say nothing of the Germans having better firearms overall.
There's a lot of old military stuff out there and it all works pretty good if its in decent shape. The only sad part of these old military firearms is that they can't talk and tell their story.

Happy D said...

Brilliant idea Mike! Wish I had thought of it.
As for the run what you brung debate. After the Waco Massacre I came to learn the reality of what happened. Knowing that the ATF body armor was weak versus 3006 I obtained 1000 rounds of WW 2 issue A.P.
A friend obtained 7.62x54 equivalent.
Old main battle rifle rounds have the punch to properly discourage feds.
This concept may discourage the dimwits even further.
Like I said brilliant!

Crustyrusty said...

Parrothead Jeff has a good point. You can still GET x54R, and for a decent price. And I'd rather put some of that downrange than 5.56, that's for sure.

And yeah, it IS mostly about what you can afford. I can't afford 1200 bucks for an M4gery. I could afford 79.95 each for a few 91/30s though.

Anonymous said...

Using a Mosin-Nagant M28 or M28/30 rifle having open sights, in conjunction with a Suomi K31 SMG, Finnish sniper Simo Häyhä is credited with over 500 kills during his service in the Winter War against the Red Army (

This remarkable achievement was accomplished in a mere 100 days.

Until you can eclipse this record, never, ever utter an aspersion against the redoubtable Mosin Nagant.


Gun Monkey said...

Imagine 1000's of these inexpensive rifles buried in 6" PVC pipes, with 100 rounds each throughout the AO. I always thought that at some point it may be very handy to have weapons in place in areas that may be difficult to sneak weapons into later.

tom said...

Points taken.

I might could think about some easier ways to do what you've suggested in a handier form as to muzzle device. If you have to bore it out anyway, there's a lot of options besides the old bayonet and FAL hider combo idea I think would be more elegant if you give me a bit of time to mull them over (as far as the ideas related to engineering such a beast related to your ideas). I'll keep in mind the 50 dollar or less project number (provided US Fed Notes don't go the way of Zim money with all the printing going on of late. Lets say 50 or under of 8/8/09 dollars, OK?).

I'm not saying I'd get involved in producing such an item because I won't and have no interest in doing so on a number of levels as that would involve the hassle of getting it FTB certed and possibly ITAR related regs, and they likely wouldn't cert it and it would be counterproductive to my relations with such people as to my livelihood. Coming up with a couple other suggestions and posting them to your email about doing so with basic plan drawings is plausible. You could post them here if you find them useful ideas.

I'll endeavor to do so soon-ish as a contribution to the cause even if I don't like the rifles. Public domain design ideas that also could be applicable in general fashion to non M-N rifles on some levels. No copyright on drawings, no patents on ideas. My name not on it anymore than it is here and will be there, in a legal sense.

We're busy working out the mechanics of an action for special purposes where plan drawings need to go to outside sub-contractors soon, so after that's done, I'll look into endeavoring a couple designs in my/our free time as opposed to sipping iced tea and questioning ideas on people's blogs :-) Gotta keep the lights on to be able to afford to play with this idea part time.

Exact dimensions on some things can't be entirely given as there is variation in various nagger muzzle specifics over the many decades they were produced and different models as to exact dimensions. I'm willing to try and suggest some road maps though.

Might be mid-fall before I've got a reasonably universal couple things drawn up that make me happy enough to "not put my name officially on but will work well and be easy for a home fabricator or basic machinist. Likely be October at the very earliest as I'd prefer to prototype before suggesting things that are untested in practice although seem to be sound ideas.

Likely be a few design tangents as well to allow for variations in skill and abilities of person with a desire to make such a muzzle device.

As to who I am, consider me a nobody as I prefer to not link my political/gun writing personal stuff to my business life. Discretion is important:

A: Because as a self admitted sometimes rude/abrasive (but I like to think, often funny at the same time) a-hole, I don't care to risk losing customers over my political beliefs, making fun of things I don't like, and technical preferences as that would not be fair to investors and partners. I don't link to my business interests on my personal web page specifically for that reason. I don't link to manufacturer friends of mine without permission on my personal web page for the exact same reasons.

B: I have to deal with alphabets on a regular basis. Teasing them in my off time on my web page is one thing...having my dogs shot and flash bangs through the windows isn't on my favored list of things to do later in life.

The Opinionated Boomer Lad

P.S. Remember, I question because I care. We're on the same side on this mess.

Kristopher said...

I think an MN rifle and a spam can of ammo to give to someone trying to fight next to you with a zip-gun might keep you alive longer than a $200 weapon accessory.

Just a thought.

thedweeze said...

The simplest answer to all this is that we cannot predict the future.

First, I'm a cheap b@stard. I'd prefer an M1A, but unless I find the legendary little old lady selling off her late hubby's guns, that's not bloody likely.

Secondly, I live in Palm Beach County, Florida, a/k/a Obamaland. Finding and forming some sort of unit is probably a fantasy. Plus, anything that even smells militia-like is gonna get overrun by various feds/police undercovers.

So far, I've spent about $1000 on rifles. I have a K98k action in a Vz-24 stock, a Yugo 24/47, a pair of No4 Enfields and an Ishapore 7.62 Enfield, plus bayonets, scope mounts and scopes, Huber triggers, and Mojo or Williams sights for all of them. Did you notice that I have both a Mauser/Enfield and a completely functioning backup rifle? That's before we talk about the spare parts (including barrels, action wrench and headspace gauges). All for about a grand. Yes, all the scopes are Chinese: I expect them to break, just like a Leupold or a Swarovski would under similar conditions, hence all rifles wear good quality iron sights.

That left over enough money that I have 2200 rounds of 8mm (Yugo M75 with 1000 reloadable Hirtenberger in reserve), 1600 .303 handloads, and about 500 7.62 NATO rounds.

One thing about the ammo drought: I have had no trouble getting components (except primers, of course) for the .303, nor have I had very much trouble getting the M75 Yugo stuff. And if I can only get .308 bullets for the Enfields, phone book paper makes great patches. Then again, I *do* have several hundred .310-.311 147 grain bullets pulled from 7.62x54R ammo...

The 8mm is clipped and loaded into those Really Quite Nice Australian bandoliers. The .303 bandoliers were dyed black first, to keep them easily identifiable. The 7.62 are loaded into repro German fallschirmjager bandos.

All this for about what a heavy-barrel M1A goes for. Without the restrictions on bullet weight and powder charge that a semi-auto imposes.

YMMV, naturlich.

Dakota said...

Doggoneit Mike, now you got me thinking about how to convert over my Mausers.....I like them better than the MN.

I like the flip up idea too I spose I will have to go get one now. LOL

Anonymous said...

I would like to add that there were hundreds of riflemen/snipers that put the Mosin to good use in at least three wars. Some racked up hundreds of kills with them. Most shooters with some training and practice can hit a man size target at 300 yards. Need some training check out the Appleseed Project. Yes you can buy a better rifle if you have the money. $400 for a nice Savage and $20 for 20 rounds of ammo. $400 gets you a good shooting rifle and 1760 rounds. You can practice a lot. And as they say, practice puts rounds on target. Also the squad level is where most firefights will be fought at. I don’t want to offend anyone but standing toe to toe with a force that has the ability to call in indirect fire or tank support won’t last long. You will have to hit and run or get so close and stay so close that you take away the technological advantage. It worked for the Russians in Stalingrad, The Chinese in Korea, and the NVA in Vietnam. But I believe the most important thing is going to be the will. We’ve already decided what price we are willing to pay for freedom if that time ever comes. What price is the other side willing to pay to take it? A man with the will to do what must be done with what he has is much more powerful then a man with the best equipment and no will at all. Equipment can be had, will cannot.

loneviking said...

I can't find much to fault the M-N for. Like so many of the old WW2 battle rifles, they aren't fast but they pack one heck of a punch. What is cover from a 5.62 at 250 yards is only concealment for many of these old battle rifles. It won't take long for any squad to be able to standarize their weapons from captured stocks. The other plus for many of these old rifles is that they have very durable, quite accurate metal sights. No need to worry about a scope going FUBAR. Ammo? There's quite a bit stashed around this country in garages and basements. The heavy stocks of these rifles make much better clubs than an M16/M4. Yes, you'll have to take the slower reload times/small magazines into account when planning a mission. But these old rifles have won wars before, and I don't think their usefulness is over yet.

Loren said...

Quite a few old rifle grenade launchers were actually cups. The muzzle attachment was off to the side, with only a short tube going over the muzzle. The gas was diverted into a port that went down into a cup. I don't think there was a block--most were intended to allow a bullet to go through in case you needed it--but it worked somehow. Such an arrangement to put the grenade tube off to the side might be viable.

After that, the only thing is making sure you can aim accurately. They used to use bloopers as mortars by putting the butt on the ground and stepping on a sling that'd been marked with ranges. A similar setup for a Nagant might be useful. Do your test shootings, then write up a table, so that it can be duplicated.

Happy D said...

Tom. I have found your criticisms and comments to be very valuable. A harsh light on a subject that must be thought through. Sincerely,

tom said...

I don't see them on the lines at any matches of any note except M-N hobbyists matches.

Mike was fair in saying it's an antiquated rifle with faults and if you want to, well go with the Col Jeff maxim of "At least it's a gun" I'll give you that.

They still aren't accurate, the ones on the market are re-re-re arsenaled often and shot with lots of corrosive.

The Famed Finn snipers had one of the better M-N variants ever produced (Finn Manufacture), a lot of them used Mausers, and the ones with USSR rifles at least had newish rifles, not ones stored under often questionable conditions for years with indifferent arsenal gunsmithing done to them to keep them running and they aren't world war II rifles, one and all, What's the year model of the design again????

Don't argue accuracy with me and I'll think about making a some suggestion. Stop drinking your own koolaide. Accept it for what it is and work with it, don't brag on it. Inherent design weaknesses are what they are. Maybe nagger people are either poor or they want to try to improve a marginally dumb antiquated design. Yeah they helped win some wars, so did rocks and pointy sticks. I propose you go up against a Platoon of Regular Modern Infantry with pointy sticks if "won wars before, sort of (with huge casualties on the side of the nagger users in most all instances this has occurred)...Commie meat grinder maneuvers often ground their own meat and the Czars that preceded them weren't much better about that. After all, they've won wars before isn't a very good argument.

Mikes idea of "there will be many around and they are possibly useful as expedients for some things" is acceptable. Trying to tell me a VW Bug is a Bugatti Veyron is pointless, stupid and silly.

You must accept the true facts of your situation with these implements, not romanticize them, then figure out how to make them useful. I think the Johnson Rifle was a nice design and with more development might have bested the M1 Garand on some levels but that isn't how development money got spent. I don't go around telling people Johnson Rifles were better than Garands.

Leave emotion and misinfomation out of this re-snipers that used them. Concentrate on making the best of dime store rifles if you insist on it, or I'll go back to thinking a lot of you are clowns who if you're worried about being able to practice shooting a lot cheaply should go buy a mid grade air rifle.

tom said...

...Breathing discipline and trigger control as well as sighting techniques are the same in .177 as they are in 7.62R and you can shoot a lot more .177 affordably. Dry fire drills and some range time with your naggers. If you expect me to take y'all seriously you have to present yourself in a way where y'all's postings don't make me laugh and cringe at the same time.

I'll see what I can do later in the early fall.

Mike you need to decide if you want a brake or a flash-hider, I'd also like to know the advantage of quick detach? Are you expecting irregulars to have done a lot of bayonet practice with their naggers too and swap back and forth between 22mm flash supp or brake? Since people always complain about x54R rifle recoil and you went with a brake, wouldn't you want it on most all the time? Gonna be flamethrowers either way, braked or flash suppressed.

I'll check back and some people might check into reality a bit more. It could be useful to them in the future (not referenced to you mike).

End note on nagger snipers. If you read their biographies, most of them were experts at fieldcraft and good shots but used their abilities to get to reasonably close range. They said do themselves.

FOR THE RECORD ON THE MOST FAMOUS OF ALL FINN SNIPERS---Simo Häyhä got quite a few of his kills, as to percentage of his tally with a KP/-31 submachine gun and his M-N pattern rifle was a Finnish M-28 with Swedish Steel barrel. He was really good at getting close to targets and staying undetected. He did well with fair equipment for the era and a lot of natural and practiced talents.

I'm quite familiar with firearms history and mechanics as it's been a lifelong pursuit and my arse doesn't accept smoke blown in it. I'm serious about the design bit if people are going to be serious about recognizing the limitations of their "chosen" or should that be "Chosin" ones?

chris horton said...

All good ideas,gents. But really,if you don't have your weapons,ammo,and basic plans in place by now,well....

The FDIC had 54 Billion in reserves to "cover" us. It's now below 14 Billion! 74 banks have failed so far this year.

We're soon to be on our own,and all our plans tested. Good Luck to all.


Anonymous said...

Hmmmmm. Not sure what I think of this. I do have my share of FALS along with a pricey LR-308 but if somebody is tight on the budget why not save up a bit more and buy a modern Savage 308 package with a scope for $350 over a Mosin?

It may not be 100 bucks for the Mosin but you get Minute of head rather than minute of torso accuracy with a bolt made for cycling under a scope and flawless reliability. The Accutrigger is easily adjustable and breaks like glass.

As for mounting grenade launchers I'm all for that. We are already launching golf balls into next week with ARs and blanks. Next the FAL....

I'm going to stay anonymous on this one :)

Weaver said...

The most important point of all is almost anyone can afford a mosin and a hundred rounds of ammo. Just like in all wars, from WWII to red dawn, use what you have until you can upgrade with the help of your enemy.


Anonymous said...

Interesting common theme in many of the comments..."people can afford"....

Casual observation of most folks will generally demonstrate people will afford exactly what they want to afford, and not a penny more.

The guy who really wants a top line AR? He'll figure out a way to afford it.

The guy who wants to "do it on the cheap"? He'll find a way to justify a M-N and 100 rounds and call it "good".

No? The same guy who "can't afford" anything more than a M-N will spend $200 on a night at a major sports event, or buy a 4-wheeler 'toy' or whatever.

Sure, there are folks who honestly can't afford anything more than $100 M-N and maybe a couple hundred rounds. And they're welcome in my outfit anytime because they're honest, and doing the absolute best they can with what they've got.

The rest, who actually can afford a better weapon but are basically skin flints who think they'll do as well as their opponents armed with the best available?

Well, at least be honest about your choices and your motivation. Those guys are hedging their bets and compromising their principles as well as the guy next to them in the field when the SHTF.

Don't mean to sound like a jerk, just a bit jaded with all the "I can't afford it" types who go out and spend their asses off on other crap. Seen it all too often.

Again, to be clear: The guys who are actually only able to afford a $100 M-N, you are doing what you can with what you've got and are to be encouraged and applauded.

It's the cheap-skates using the excuse of cost this is aimed at.

Loren said...

Well, that last anon had a good point, but it can be a little more complicated than that. I have my Ishy, and I'll eventually be able to shoot with it--hopefully before the ball drops. While I'd like a nice AR-10 eventually, I anticipate that it'll be more useful for me to build up my soldering supplies, and other things I'll be looking at to provide in relation to support and electrical engineering. Thus while I could eventually afford a nicer rifle, I don't plan to be on the front line much, especially at first. Thus, since the rifle isn't going to be the first "weapon" of choice, it makes little sense to place a lot of money in it.

Anonymous said...

LOts of good points all around here. Yes some have purchased their classic rifles with no intention of getting anything else. They are very much the same as the guy carrying the old wheel gun who will swear up and down he is as prepared for a gun fight as the guy packing a Glock with 17rds in the stick. 6 vs 17???What happens if your first 6 rds dont bring down the bad guy? Reload that old wheel and duck for cover thats what happens. Meanwhile Mr. Glock is still in the fight for 11 more shots. Some guys just get attached to their old favorites and no amount of logic is going to convince them otherwise and they will spout off many a well practiced cliche to rationalize their position. Now this being said if you are prepared for the limitations of your equipment then no problem. Frame your tactics accordingly and you should be fine (should be).
I have two rifles I think of in terms of use for resistance. The AK and the SKS. The SKS is for back up now. I purchased it many years ago when it WAS all I could afford. When I was able I purchased my AK. Same with my handgun. Start cheap and purchase better when able. I had this conversation with another gun buddy back when we were expecting our tax returns. He said he expected to get back about $1000.00and he wanted to know what I thought about getting a better AK than the one he has. I told him that would be good then he could sell or give away the older Ak he has. I also told him I might do something different if I had the same tax return and his lack of family responsibilities (he is single) I told him I would use the money to buy as many MN rifles with 200 rds each as I could get. That way you could equip a squad of neighbors and family members who are to blind to see the storm brewing. 100 rds to train them to shoot resonably well and 100 rds to get M4's from all the goons who think Kevlar will stop 7.62 x54.
They are cheap force multipliers. They are for those who did not prepare NOW! They are for leaving in your truck so you have a larger caliber firearm at all times. They are for putting a cheap scope on and squeezing just enough accuracy out of them to take one shot at a well selected target and then dropping to make your escape. They have plenty of uses but they are not replacements for modern magazine fed battle rifles.


Happy D said...

Grenadier1 I think you summed up the best reasons to have an old war dog or twenty around.

Anonymous said...

If I understand it correctly, a Spanish FR8, and an H&K G3 /91 rifle will fit and launch 22MM rifle grenades without modification, if using grenade blanks (not blank cartridges)and nothing else... ceptin' fer the grenade of course...

Is this true? Cuz, if it is, I want to locate some inerts, OR

....plans to build. I'd like to play with those, strictly for fun, of course.

Any idea as to where inerts or plans can be found????

Loren said...

Just google it, anon. There are adapters that can be set up, or there are sites that still sell the full practice grenades.

Look at the muzzle of your rifle. for grenades, the flashhider/whatever will generally be 22mm in diameter, and will have at least an inch or two at this diameter, so that the grenade will go on properly and stuff.

Anonymous said...

I personally prefer a shotgun with .223 ammo. I would like to get one of those ridiculous triple-barreled babies out there, but isn't that more in the land of fantasy than anything?

Moe Satriani said...

I have tried to get most of the guns that I have shooting the same ammo so that I can bulk up on it without have to buy all kinds of ammo. I usually get guns that shoot .223. Are those rifles black powder firearms ? My old neighbor that I go shooting with every once in a while has one that looks a little similar to those guns. I will have to ask him to send me a picture.