>Slavaboos and poorfags will defend this

>>33898467
It's a cheap piece of shit, and ammo costs too much now.

I don't own a nugget, but if it gets more newfriends/poorfriends shooting, I would call it a good gun in spite of it's operational flaws

>>33898467
Defend that it exists? I mean. It served the victors of a pretty serious war...

>>33898467
I think maybe you wanted to post this thread back in 2014 or something?

File: 1487960450825.jpg (11KB, 211x212px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 211x212px

>>33898467
>factory refurb
>not even a hex receiver

File: 20160524_151357.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>33898467
Problem?

>>33898467

It is too expensive for what it is and there are newer production bolt action rifles that do just as well if not better for lower prices. That said, I'm keeping my nugget.

>>33898467
Don't be stupid, it's a fine rifle for normal people doing normal things.
It's more accurate than most of us unless you really want to turn the boring knob to 10 and shoot from a bench.

File: Screenshot_20170430-211129.png (672KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

672KB, 1080x1920px

>>33898467
>Poorfags
Hmmm

>>33898749
>cherry picking
Hmmm

File: 1337503692431.png (130KB, 536x593px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 536x593px

>>33898467
Richfag here.

I've owned 7 nuggets and only sold 1 off.

They are great rifles by all measures of the fact and you are just a hater because you missed out on buying them at $75.

>>33898749
>a couple rifles out of literal tens of millions being valuable means they're good
Really makes your dingle dongle.

>>33898808
>t.bought an AR-15 guy

>>33898859
I don't give a shit about ARs and I will never buy one.

>>33898808
They're good milsurp regardless of the price paid. But milsurp isn't a poorfag game anymore.

File: nugget w acessories.jpg (395KB, 1031x773px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1031x773px

I got an Izzy hex ex-dragoon for $150 and feel like I overpaid.
Still, I feel like I have that Mosin box checked, so I guess thats nice. It's kinda fun to shoot I guess.

File: 4chan autism.jpg (14KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x100px

I do like these Mosin threads though.

My favorite part is the Mosin Hipsters who stroke their own anuses over owning a Finn or a Remington or some shit OMG MUGH OBSCURE NUGGET.

lol everytime.

>>33898550
Why no love for the Type 53?

>>33898902
Where are you guys finding these crazy deals? I look on Armslist etc and the other go to sites all the mosin I see are like 300+ at minimum.

>>33899159
10 years ago

File: Untitled (133).jpg (655KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 2560x1440px

Mosins are fun.

File: 1480544903094.jpg (72KB, 1199x365px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1199x365px

>>33898467
>Slavaboos unironically think that their shitty $200 rifle created by a emaciated slav covered in shit can even compare to a Springfield Armory M1 Garand

>>33899159
Yeah, I bought that thing like back in 2010.
Party's over.

File: porky btfo.png (541KB, 1023x390px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1023x390px

>>33898467
>poorfags

classist scum, you'll hang when us proles untie

>>33898770

How I wish I was born 10 years earlier. Or had had the sense to start gathering milsurp a decade ago when I first thought of it.

A rifle that was a cheap $75 large bore rifle with even cheaper ammunition. When it is basically priced at a simple whim in value, you can get a rifle that would put down most of what you shot it at.

Now a days where they're around $250 and surplus ammo drying up, you can get the used to be $75 rifle or a modern bolt action for $300 in a caliber you can buy cheap at big box stores or even cheaper online.

It's just a cheap gun that was meant for fun at the end of its cycle.

Daily reminder that Mosin prices and 7.62x54r prices will only continue to go up due to a dwindling supply. If you wan to make bank in about 10 or 15 years, buy a shit ton of Mosins. The fact you didn't buy a shit ton of Mosins 10 years ago when they were only 100 dollars is bad enough, not investing now is just as stupid.

File: Untitled (95).jpg (738KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

738KB, 2560x1440px

>>33899452
I dont see lightball surplus going any higher than it is now simply because new production is the same price.

File: Reassembled Left View Reciever.jpg (3MB, 3072x2304px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3072x2304px

>>33899253
You're not missing anything.

Milsurp has a lifecycle- First, they're so cheap everyone thinks they're garbage. Then, the surplus runs out and the price doubles or triples. Suddenly, people think they're worthwhile... simply because they cost more.

After time, the price is ten times or more what it started at. And, predictably, people then give the weapon revered, god-like status. Just because it costs a lot more. All the whole time, it's the same old mediocre issued rifle it always was.

Pic related, I can get $2,700 for this old Mauser now, and people shit their pants over it because OMG MUH MATCHING NO IMPORT MARK and OMG MUH SWASTIKUZ, and OMG MUH SCOPE RAILZ.

When it was imported, it fetched about $30, or about $250 adjusted for inflation. It's the same, old, ordinary, 2 MOA rifle it always was, it's just more expensive now.

You just missed a whole lot of autism, that's all. Milsurp is, honestly, all pretty mediocre.

>>33899452
>10 or 15 years
Yeah, or you could spend that same amount in mutual funds or ETFs, have about 4 times the market return, buy all the mosins you would have originally in 10-15 years, and still have twice as much money.

Just because guns don't lose value, that does NOT mean they are a good investment over time. L2$

>>33900179

I'm interested in them for the historical value, not because I think they're superweapons.

>>33900298
They don't have that much historical value. It's not like you're owning King Tut's sarcophagus.

I got a Finn M91 for 75 bucks back in 2013. Eat your heart out.

>>33898467
>This will defend Slavaboos and Poorfags
FTFY

>>33900728

Different strokes. I wouldn't give two shits about Tut's tomb beyond what I could sell it for to buy more sweet, sweet shooty things.

>>33898550
I hate people like you, STOP HOGGING ALL THE NUGGETS

File: IMG_20170508_153549[1].jpg (3MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x3120px

>>33898467

>Poorfags

KO 91/30 Molot factory refurb non-issued hex sniper with chrome lined barrel, Huber Concepts adjustable trigger, LPS scope, Brass Stacker cheek riser & leather sling.

>>33901296
so $10

>>33899189
Do they?

>>33901296
Nice gat where you from and how much was it?

>>33899189
nobody thinks that dipshit, I own both and the M1 is far superior

>>33900728
You're an idiot.

>>33900728
Yes they do.

>>33901429
Good ol' US of A. As for the rifle, I bought it from Molot-USA, last one they had for $900. But since Molot isn't around anymore only place you can get them if second hand.

>>33901511


Big price but it looks sweet. Jelly/10. That chrome bore is really the kicker that thing will last the next 200 years holy smokes

>$220 and rising for the rifle

>ammo .50 cents a round

the meme is dead.

>>33898467
Yeah I'd defend mosins.
I don't see how this is a bad thing.

File: Portal.jpg (36KB, 519x441px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 519x441px

>>33898948
>People enjoying things is pathetic

>>33901262
I sold 5 of them. Want to sell one more.

>>33898467
was never a fan in the first place, much preferred my mum collection. then sold them off, because they suck.

dumped all into Tanfoglio race gun, got bored because I suck at that, thinking of cowboy funtimes

>>33898467
I've owned 3 Mosins, and sold 3 Mosins. They were just the bottom tier of surplus rifles, and now that they have gone up in price, they are super not worth buying.

>>33901296
>KO91/30
Please tell me what is the date on your receiver. I really want to know if these are new-production receivers or just recycled ones.

>>33898467
its a rifle

>>33898467
it shoot good tho

>>33899452
7.62x54r is still in military use. Chances are good it's gonna take a little longer than most detractors think to vanish.

How much does a true matching (ie not force matched) one go for these days?

File: 1469888931021.jpg (329KB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 2250x1500px

>>33901745
The new ones like pic related use new receivers.

But Molot also sells old Soviet refurbished Mosins as KO 91/30s. I believe it's to comply with Russian gun laws.

>>33901604
somewhat interested
What kind, and how much?

>>33902251
Man I wouldn't mind having a brand new Mosin sniper model.

File: 19392.jpg (408KB, 1565x446px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1565x446px

>>33898467
I don't even fucking care, mine was my guide into hasguns and she was a good teacher.

>>33900179
>>33900728
>They don't have that much historical value.
>pretty mediocre.
Yeah, if you're a fucking faggot named Zed. I don't give a rat's ass about historical or theoretical value, if someone offered me $3k for my fucking Mosin I wouldn't sell it.

I know you're a proven fucking retard, so I'll explain the reality of it. The bottom line for most of us who like milsurp is the fact that we can take that ol' Garand, Mosin, Mauser, Tokarev, Luger or C96 and actually make a relic work again. We can bring it back to life and enjoy it for a while. It's not a thing that has to just sit in a box and be looked at, it's something that will actually thunder and spit fire at the range just like it did in 1916 or 1941 or whatever fucking day of whatever fucking war it was in.

>>33902251
>The new ones like pic related use new receivers.
Proofs? Please, I really really want to see a modern tang date. So far no-one has been able to furnish me with actual pictorial evidence.

File: 10481306.jpg (841KB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

841KB, 1920x1440px

>>33902458

>>33902622
I JUST WANT ONE OF THOSE BOLTS PLEASE. PLEASE!

>>33902622
While that is pretty cool

>that machining

Did they subcontract the receiver production to CZ or something?

>>33902292
M91 dragoon Finn capture. Non converted. I'm wary of shipping it because there is a crack in the upper hand guard I don't want it to break in shipping.

>>33898808
what is wrong with the desigh?
>inb4 rimmed round

File: My 1934 Mosin.jpg (927KB, 1536x2560px) Image search: [Google]

927KB, 1536x2560px

>>33902622
And for comparison, here is the receiver of a Soviet Mosin that Molot sells as hunting rifles under the the standard KO 91/30 designation.

>>33902382
>The bottom line for most of us who like milsurp is the fact that we can take that ol' Garand, Mosin, Mauser, Tokarev, Luger or C96 and actually make a relic work again. We can bring it back to life and enjoy it for a while. It's not a thing that has to just sit in a box and be looked at, it's something that will actually thunder and spit fire at the range just like it did in 1916 or 1941 or whatever fucking day of whatever fucking war it was in.
Amen brother

i have a Mosin. I also have 3 Mausers. i like them all. fite me fegs

>>33902731
Well compared to others the single stack magazine is inferior, it's too long compared to universal short rifles, and the 2 piece bolt is less than ideal.

It's still a good milsurp rifle, but it has flaws.

>>33903030
>the single stack magazine is inferior
i disagree. besides the rifle was developed for a rimmed round so a single stack mag is basically (but not necessarily) required
> it's too long compared to universal short rifles
both the Mauser and the Mosin have carbine variants. K98k and M38 and M44
> the 2 piece bolt is less than ideal.
yup

>>33898467
Worth it for about 80-160$ max.
Also the finnish models where the best.

>>33903073
>single stack mag is basically (but not necessarily) required
7.62x54r is based on the .303 British which is pretty famous for being used in a double stack magazine.

>>33903161
>'54r
>based on .303 Brit
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA, fuck no.

File: M27_Tang_Date.jpg (353KB, 1024x800px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1024x800px

>>33902622
>>33902752
The TANG date like pic related; they can write anything on the receiver ring since the Soviets didn't mark them.

>>33902752
That's not the receiver; that's the barrel.

>>33901745
1925

File: IMG_20170508_194351[1].jpg (3MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x3120px

>>33903939
Forgot pic.

>>33903939
>>33904030
>1925
Is this the same receiver as in >>33902622 ?

If it is, then that can't be a year date as they weren't making round receivers in 1925.

>>33904077
It's this one.
>>33901296

>>33902382
>The bottom line for most of us who like milsurp is the fact that we can take that ol' Garand, Mosin, Mauser, Tokarev, Luger or C96 and actually make a relic work again. We can bring it back to life and enjoy it for a while. It's not a thing that has to just sit in a box and be looked at, it's something that will actually thunder and spit fire at the range just like it did in 1916 or 1941 or whatever fucking day of whatever fucking war it was in.

True

>>33898467
Perfectly good rifle, reliable enough for regular or strenuous use, accurate out to 1000 yards, hard hitting ammunition.

>>33904126
>accurate out to 1000 yards
yeah okay, maybe a Finn one

>>33904126
>strenuous use

>ITT: No one mentions that one dude who got into a car accident and by freak luck his 91/30 prevented the roof from caving in on him

>>33904155
>Don't worry comrade, I'll save you!

>>33900179
Fun story, customer of mine is a gun store owner out in middle Indiana. He got a shotgun of some sort in pretty rough shape but he cleaned it up and got it working really nice, tried selling it at like $150 and no one even looked at it.
So his dad came in and had him up the price to like $200 or something like that and it was sold the next day.

>>33898467
It works as an effective spear.

>>33899189
What?
$170 (in todays market, way to high desu) 120 yo slav design bolt gun vs $1200 (too high desu) 80 yo leaf design semi auto gun. Nobody ever does what you just said ever

>>33904126
>any production x54r load of any era
>out of any barrel length
>supersonic past 800 yards
No

Therefor
>accurate at 1000 yards
Also no. If the round drops transonic accuracy goes to absolute dogshit. I don't care if you were shooting 0.05 MOA at 800 yards, if the round drops subsonic between 800 and 1000 you won't be shooting 10 MOA at 1000.

>>33900179
its a good investment tho. Its like buying a porsche 930, sitting on it for 10 years then making mad dosh

>>33901502
>zed's an idiot
thats not news yobo

File: full mast.jpg (16KB, 320x283px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x283px

>>33902251
>stamped 7.62x51

I need this in my life. With a scope and shooting high quality x51 this could be a lot of fun.

>>33904101
>hex
OK then that is probably a 1925-dated receiver.

>>33903194
hes an idiot for that yes, but it is a rimmed round in a double stack, just like dravonov and svt

>>33898467
Garbage Rod won against Sturmgewehr.

>>33898467
What about Finaboos?

>>33903073
With regards to carbines, I don't consider those when I make a comparison because they were not issued as a general infantry rifle. Now a short rifle (which the 98k would be considered) is fair game.

>>33902721
Interesting. How much do you want?

>>33904537
No, it didn't.

Having 20,000,000 more men they could mindlessly throw against Sturmgewehr while they frantically made tanks that were impervious to Sturmgewehr won against Sturmgewehr.

>>33898467
what is there to defend? its an above average design for its time. some of its variants are extremely high quality, some arent, depending on when it was manufactured and by who.

>>33902382
Gunfoedora: The Post

>>33902382
>I know you're a proven fucking retard,
>>33905140
See?

>History in action
>fedora

Go suck-start a shotgun please. The world doesn't need you plaguing it.

I have an M39 and I love it. Fuck you.

>>33900991
But whose dick did you suck komrade?

File: 1492821752706.jpg (54KB, 826x500px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 826x500px

>>33898467
>paid 150 for chinese mosin
>its literally less than one day of work for me
Can you tell me how that was a bad deal?

File: mosin banner.png (26KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x100px

>>33898467

>>33900179
>he didn't sell it

File: Untitled2.png (953KB, 796x597px) Image search: [Google]

953KB, 796x597px

>>33905200
Calling surplus military rifles "history in action" is like calling a tree stump "a testament to the miracle of evolution". It's a meaningless appellation, because it can be applied so broadly and it's meaning is so loosely defined.

The reason you are 100% fedoramode is that you sit there stroking your Mosin imagining that it was at the Battle of Stalingrad, felling Nazi after Nazi in a blaze of glory while fighter-bombers buzzed overhead and artillery crashed all around with the Soviet flag flapping in the background. That's where you LOVE to imagine all the little dents and dings and worn out muzzle came from.

The reality is that you have no idea. For all you know it sat in the corner of some barracks way the fuck out in Omsk, got cleaned to hell and gone because the praporshchik had no other idea on how to keep the soldiers busy, and then the thing got shipped to Izhevsk to be arsenal refinished before being thrown on a train to rattle off to who-knows-where, and THATS where it got all those dents and dings.

You have NO idea. None. You're just sperging out over some fantasy you have. They're about as historically significant as a canteen.

Pure. Fantasy.

>>33907911
Why would I sell it? I got it for $200, that's about what it's worth, and it's a good addition to my collection.