Mosin Model 1891 vs Russian Winchester Model 1895

The repeater, of course.

>>31625296
Itsvactually the 1895, but eh. The nagant has no advantages to the soldier in the field except for parts commonality. Inferior build, inferior resistance to mud, slower rate of fire. I know I'd take the American rifle any day.

>>31625296
I'm a Mosin fanboy to the death, but dammit, the Winchester 1895 is such a brilliant rifle. I'm still a bit baffled that it was basically a dead end. A box-fed levergun like that offers so many advantages over a bolt action rifle regarding ergonomics, mud resistance, etc.

I would absolutely kill for a Russian 1895....

I wonder if the Winchester have much problems with rimlock?

You idiots know there's a very good reason leverguns saw almost zero military use, right? To accomplish the same feat the lever action has to be much more complex and refined, and typically are less accurate and weaker. You can't cycle them prone easily, there's more movement to be done, mounting optics was difficult.

I would take a Winchester 1895 because its different, but from a military standpoint it was zero benefits over the 1891.

File: WWI-Russians-with-Winchester-M1895-Muskets.jpg (601KB, 1584x888px) Image search: [Google]

601KB, 1584x888px

What gives you guys the idea that the lever-action is more resistant to mud than a bolt-action?

File: CarbineMkI.jpg (126KB, 700x221px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 700x221px

>>31625296
Both rubbish

>>31625296
Mosin. While the 1895 is one of my grail guns, I'm not blind to the inherent disadvantages compared to the Mosin.

>>31626464
Forgotten Weapons said so

>>31626331
How often were people shooting prone in WW1?

>>31627328
Very, very often. Particularly when new trench lines were being established. The area would be garrisoned with infantrymen lying in essentially ranger graves.

>>31627718
People aren't smart enough to hold the rifle at a 45° angle.

>>31628412
Nope. This is why the lever was never adopted As an American service rifle

>>31625296

As an owner of the 1895' spiritual successor, I can say I'd rather the mosin if I'm going into battle.

Lever rifles are great for some things, robustness is not one of them.

>>31625384
Browning/Miroku still makes the BLR, including in .308 and .30-06.

>>31630500

Winchester made the M88 with a detachable box mag, short throw lever (that has the trigger travel with it, no pinching your finger between the lever and the trigger).

File: 1469998622566.jpg (38KB, 800x792px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 800x792px

>>31626553

>>31625306
They are both repeaters senpai.

>>31625340
>box fed lever action
>more resistant to mud ingress than a bolt action

ishiggydiggydoo

>>31625340
>Inferior build, inferior resistance to mud, slower rate of fire.
You know not every nugget is a rush job right, not to mention what happens when mud decides to occupy the guts of a lever gun. It's purely personally preference here so for me I would take the 1895 since it's more natural to me

>>31626331
>and typically are less accurate
Than a modern bolt action sure. But in that era it's all barrel bands anyway.
>and weaker
And yet the 1895 and 1886 existed
>You can't cycle them prone easily
Horseshit. Go try it
>there's more movement to be done
Different movement
>mounting optics was difficult.
In an era where offset mounts and 2x Scopes that ran 2/3 the length of the barrel we're high tech but biopters and ladders we're far more common?

Complexity. That's all there is to it. Look how long it took the US along to switch to repeaters ffs. Bolt action are simpler and more cost efficient end of story

>>31630658
Funnily enough, the 1895 is more resistant to mud ingress. Other lever actions might be different, but the way it works keeps the mud out.

>>31628412
Thats not even necessary unless you're flat as fuck and resting the rifle on something besides your own hand. If it's in hand and shouldered then the levee clears the ground

>>31631034

That you for confirming that you really have never used Winchester m/1895. The distance to which the lever extends is really long and in fact shooting prone does require either turning the rifle (about 45 degree works) or raising the whole rifle upwards. Turning the rifle is the preferred option, since it also seems to make extraction more reliable. Magazine actually seems to work ok, although I have not really tried it that much stripper clips.

Arguing about how easy installing scope was is rather pointless considering the Russians did not issue rifle scopes or scoped rifles at that time.

While m/1895 is a nice rifle, for World War 1 Eastern Front Mosin-Nagant m/1891 was much better weapon. Winchester just was not designed for muddy trenches. From m/1891 rifles I would pick cossack/dragoon - it is bit lighter and handier than the (long) infantry rifle version.