Mosin-Nagant hypothesis-

[chowan]

New guy, hello.

I have a M-N bolt I want to convert to .45-70, then supply a donor receiver to it. I'm investigating cutting the triggerguard flush with the bottom of the stock, also.

My hypothesis- I'm thinking a Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle rear sight, which is basically the Lyman folding rear sight found on the 10/22 with an aperture sight plate instead of the notched plate, might work drifted into a 3/8ths dovetail cut on the cocking piece.

An easy application for a receiver mounted aperture sight that doesn't crowd a scope, it folds down, etc.

I measured the width of the cocking piece, it comes to 15/32nds +/-, and the sight base measures 19/32nds +/-.

There's room to adjust for clearances, etc, I *think*, but it seems the sight base won't interfere with anything left as-is. If so, it would make a practical and tidy installation.

Thoughts?

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/oidad/m14.jpg

Thanks.

[richhodg66]

I have seen peeps designed to be mounted on the cocking piece of Mosins. Remember, they were made in America prior to 1917 and a lot of them made it into the hands of shooters then who sporterized them, I have one of these with Remington stamps. The one I saw a picture of was made in the '30s as I recall, wish I could find it now.

[Gtek]

I do not mean to be critical. Have you ever wiggled the cocking piece on the MN with a case chambered ( please try with empty case in house). I have more than a couple and most you can see the cocking piece climbing up as that butter smooth, crisp trigger is pulled. If you are after a peep what about coming of left rec. wall or up on front bridge? There are several outfits that make peep assy's that mount on factory pre-drilled scope holes that could be fitted. Just thoughts. Gtek

[SquirrelHollow]

If it wasn't for the "climb" when the trigger is pulled, it would probably work. Generally, bolt lock up is quite repeatable.

The 'climb', though... it's a problem that can't be avoided.

[chowan]

Thanks- that's why it's a hypothesis:)

What sights are the sights mentioned?

[3006guns]

I made a 45-70 from a MN some years ago on a boring Saturday afternoon. I used an old Numerich muzzle loading barrel, threaded it to fit the MN action and opened the bolt face. Didn't have a chamber reamer, so chambering was accomplished with a small boring bar on my lathe. Sitting in a pre-bubba'ed cut military stock it was, without a doubt, the UGLIEST rifle I'd ever seen and a single shot to boot.

I only recently fired it at our local range and it will consistantly group in the black at 100yds. with a 380 grain boolit. Ugly or not, it's a keeper.

[Ed in North Texas]

snip

I'm investigating cutting the triggerguard flush with the bottom of the stock, also.



I thought about just dropping this post. I thought surely it is a waste of time because everybody knows eliminating the triggerguard is dangerous. Then I thought about "everybody knows", and realized that is never accurate. So at the risk of insulting those who do know, here it is.

Welcome to the forum. I suspect you really meant that you were thinking of cutting the magazine flush, perhaps using a replacement triggerguard. I'm sure you know exposed triggers are a disaster waiting to happen.

Good luck with the project.

Ed

[sheepdog]

Or you could just buy a 45/70 instead of converting a nice Mosin into a $99 hand grenade.

[chowan]

Yes- by cutting the triggerguard I did mean flush to the stock by trimming the magazine, leaving the actual trigger guard in place.


Or you could just buy a 45/70 instead of converting a nice Mosin into a $99 hand grenade.

Sounds you don't think it's a good idea:) Can you expand on that?

Here is a sight as mentioned above, I believe it's a "Pacific R1"-

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s56/oidad/pacific_r_91mn.jpg

[SquirrelHollow]

Here is a sight as mentioned above, I believe it's a "Pacific R1"-



Several companies make superchargers and turbo chargers that can be installed on Geo Metros, too.

Just because the product is available, doesn't mean it is a good idea (or even works as intended).


On rifles like the old Krags, a cocking piece mounted peep worked fairly well. But, those rifles had tighter tolerances than the Mosins. The Mosins are just too sloppy, in my opinion.

[Hamish]

From the RCBS Cast Bullet Manual number 1:

p.36 "With the exception of the M1 Carbine, cast bullets are unsuitable for gas operated arms. Fouling plugs the gas system, creating malfunctions."

Like 90% of the stuff on the forum was deemed dumb, dangerous, or disastrous at one time or another. The cool part about this forum is that there are cowboy-rocket scientist-history teacher-outlaw pirate types here that have more than a touch of the Missouri attitude in them.

http://forums.handloads.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=27014&PN=1

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9411043/m/430102967?r=620106967#620106967


I had forgotten about this one:

http://www.castbullet.com/makeit/rr.htm

[Dan Cash]

One thing about gun people; the surely are opinionated.

[chowan]

One thing about gun people; the surely are opinionated.

-I'd have to disagree with that... ;-)

Thanks to all.

[KCSO]

I tried Jr's sight made from a sling swivel post and it works as good an a cocking piece sight will work on a M/N. Ok for short range hunting but not a target sight for sure.

[Hamish]

chowan, to get back to your question, how could this *not* work? Something like the A2 AR flip sight would seem to be about optimum, but the sight shown in the OP would surely add negligible weight.

I find it hard to believe that one of the lovable old cumudgeons here does'nt own a Pacific R1.

[chowan]

I find it hard to believe that one of the lovable old cumudgeons here does'nt own a Pacific R1.

I make a study of old sights, apertures in particular- I never heard of the R1 until this thread; seems the Rice, too, would work on a split bridge rifle other than a Krag- there are plenty of them besides a M-N.

Hell, I don't even own a Mosin receiver yet, I've got plenty of time to make more mistakes:)

[2manygunz]

IMHO, if the "bolt rise" is consistent, the sight should work within reason. Think about all the 1911 type hand guns, SKS rifles, and there are probably others I cannot recall just now. They are rather loose collections of parts that function in an acceptable manor because the parts are in pretty much the same state of alignment when the trigger is pulled. They may "flop all over the place" after the shot, but return to the same starting point.

[plmitch]

IMHO, if the "bolt rise" is consistent, the sight should work within reason. Think about all the 1911 type hand guns, SKS rifles, and there are probably others I cannot recall just now. They are rather loose collections of parts that function in an acceptable manor because the parts are in pretty much the same state of alignment when the trigger is pulled. They may "flop all over the place" after the shot, but return to the same starting point.

Your theory seems plausible.

[markshere2]

I would point out that handgun accuracy is an entirely different set of standards than rifle accuracy.

Most handguns are more accurate ( hold a tighter tolerance) than their shooters out to the practical limits of the combination of bullet/ gun / shooter.

But for a handgun, the short sight radius, short barrel, aiming posture of holding it up, acceptable powder load, etc all add up to keep "accuracy" less than 100 yards for most.

Regarding the SKS tolerances- there's a lot of slop all over the rifle, but both sights stay still throughout the firing process.

Rifles should shoot tight groups. Having seen my Mosin cocking piece wiggle all over the place as the trigger is squeezed, I doubt it would be a useful sighting system for distance work.

[Larry Gibson]

I don't know about "bolt rise" but the cocking pieces on my MNs go "down" as the trigger is pulled. It would be disconcerting to maintain a decent sight alignment/sight picture as the aperture moved down during trigger pull. However, if your MN has a decent 2 stage trigger as some Finn M39s have you can get a decent sight alignment/sight picture just before the 2nd stage of the trigger is pulled. Still, all in all, not a good sight arrangement and probably why the cocking piece aperture sights are not made nor used anymore.

Larry Gibson

[chowan]

Well, further, then- is the rise/fall/movement of the cocking piece necessary for the the trigger to work? IOW, if the cocking piece was held stationary in the vertical plane, say by a slot milled into its right side that engaged a stud/screw in the receiver, would it prevent the trigger from correctly functioning?

[Rio Grande]

I've considered this also. Just never got around to it.
Why argue about it?

How about a little empirical data?
That is, just go and do it and lets see how accurate the dang thing is or isn't.
What's to lose. Mosin cocking pcs. are not expensive.

[SquirrelHollow]

IMHO, if the "bolt rise" is consistent, the sight should work within reason. Think about all the 1911 type hand guns, SKS rifles, and there are probably others I cannot recall just now. They are rather loose collections of parts that function in an acceptable manor because the parts are in pretty much the same state of alignment when the trigger is pulled. They may "flop all over the place" after the shot, but return to the same starting point.

Russian SKSs, some of the early Norinco SKSs, and a few other nationalities are actually nicely machined rifles.

If the rifle hasn't been abused, they lock up tightly when the bolt closes. So, lockup is very predictable.
There is a reason the Russians replaced the SKS with the AK... the SKS was too good for their standards, and required too much machining (where a good portion of the AK is stamped).

Don't blame the design for the damage caused by negligent owners/soldiers, and lazy countries (such as China in later years) that cut corners to increase production. Real SKSs are good rifles (primarily Russians). The cheap trash that was produced by other countries really shouldn't be called by the SKS name.

[Josh Smith]

Hello,

The bolt is not static enough in the Mosin-Nagant to rely solely on a rear sight on the cocking piece.

What it will do well is help you focus your attention on the front and rear sights, much like those one peep things that fit on shooting glasses.

As Mr. Gibson mentioned, the bolt follows the sear downward for a bit when the trigger is pulled. The Finns tried to fix this, but found that the fix -- two rails on the cocking piece riding in two recesses cut into the receiver -- made the rifle unreliable in adverse conditions like mud and snow.

If you're dead set on a diopter rear sight, you'd be best off trying to find a Finn 28/76 sight:

http://images42.fotki.com/v1378/photos/4/47955/6905608/Finn2876_rearsight2-vi.jpg

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?75510-Gun-porn-M-28-76-all-cleaned-up-an-ready-to-go!

Those rifles have been beating almost all other nations' rifles -- including Mausers -- in matches for some time now.

Regards,

Josh

[chowan]

all appreciated, thanks.

[Rio Grande]

That Finn sight is the cat's meow.
Thank you, Josh.

[KCSO]

On the rear sight situation see my other post with the pictures, total cost $1.50 and labor.
Now as to making a Mosin into a bomb by converting it to 45-70, far from it! The Mosin is stronger than an Enfield and i have a mighty nice Enfield in 45-70 and as an added advantage the Mosin magazine should work better than the 303's. I might actually do one of these myself just for the fun of it. As to the ethics of converting a $90 milsurp into a hunting rifle, that is up to everyone to decide for himself but if I can make somethinf I want at a reasonable price I see no problem with it. I do hate to see a $90 rifle made into a $20 heapp of parts but that's the only way some folks learn. I sure didn't see too many complaints about the Springfield I posted a while back, and a well done Mosin would be nice also.

[lemming]

Amazing thread!

I'd heard there was a match-grade aperture backsight for the Mosin Nagant, but I've never seen pictures before. Any idea where I might find one to buy?

I've wanted to put decent sights on my 1940 vintage MN ever since I shot a 1" group off the bench at 100 yards using the Mojo ghost ring and Partizan factory ammo; I beleive the rifle's capable of superb performance, but the sights are holding it back. The Mojo is better than the factory sight, for sure, but our club range *starts* at 300 yards...

So far, all I've done is fit an Italian repro Creedmore tang sight. It fits OK, and it should give me enough elevation out to 500 yards or so, but -

1. You have to fold it back every time you open the bolt
2. It offers elevation but almost no windage

(1) is a PITA but I can probably live with it. (2) is rather more of an issue; am considering replacing the foresight with a Pedersoli tunnel sight with a certain limited amount of windage adjustment. But these sights cost more than I paid for the rifle... If I could locate one of those dedicated aperture sights, I'd far rather spend the money on that and a bolt job.

Other advantage of the Creedmore type sight is that the only permanent modification is 2 holes drilled into the wood, which cd be easily filled & disguised should I wish to return the rifle to original spec. Not that I'm unduly bothered about that aspect.

Scopes are out for me; our club shoots iron sights only.

[Milsurp Junkie]

Why not jb-weld or soft solder a small drilled out hex nut on the rear site leaf? My mosin shoots low, and I have to have the rear site set at 200 yards for a <100 yard target. If it doesn''t work, just heat it up and back to where you started.

[truckjohn]

The main benefit of a farther rear mounted sight aperture is to increase the sight radius.. Unfortunately, all the benefit of increasing the sight radius is undone by making it wobbly... It's akin to using a broken scope because you don't like iron sights....

You can buy a commercial replacement peep aperture deal that replaces the existing sight ladder... I actually own the SKS model of the sight - it has a wheel you turn to do fine adjustment on vertical, and a screw to adjust side to side shift.... Works quite well... especially if you prefer a peep/ghost ring to a notch...

In the end.. Time and experience is the great winnowing fan.. and the cream rises to the top.... There are a TON of rifles out there with rear cocking pieces.... Hundreds of Millions made over the years...

Thanks

[lemming]

I'm assuming the sight Truckjohn has in mind is the Mojo ghost-ring aperture unit, which I've got on my M-N at the moment. It's a huge improvement on the military ladder sight, entirely adequate out to about 200 yards, but beyond that it quickly runs out of clicks, having a limited range of adjustment and fairly coarse increments.

I found out why Creedmore type sights screwed into the woodwork of a M-N don't work; the sight smacks you in the face when the gun goes off. It's like shooting with a scope half an inch from your eye. Forget it.

Next step; I've got a Parker Hale match rearsight orginally designed for the BSA .22 match target rifle, which I might just be able to mount on an offset plate on the left hand side of the woodwork. It'll probably mean butchering the bolt handle (unless I can mount it in front of the bolt handle, as I believe was done sometimes with aperture sights on '03 Springfields) and so I'm reminding myself of the old adage about thinking three times before cutting once...

[Lead Fred]

Being that the Brit 303 SMLE has already been converted, thats the way I would go.

http://www.lowescertifiedguns.com/smleiiicustom45-70govtrifle942used.aspx

http://www.chuckhawks.com/gibbs_summit.htm

[Junior1942]

There is almost zero slop in the Mosin-Nagant swivel stud peep sight linked above
http://www.castbullet.com/makeit/rr.htm by Hamish. Side to side, it's .001" each way. I made 10 bolt, dry fire cycles and measured the distance between the cocking piece and the right side of the action. The AV was ~.001". The gap varied from ~.003" to ~.004". As far as the up and down movement others have observed, I could see NO movement in mine. It's an M44.

[KLR]

Why argue about it?

How about a little empirical data?
That is, just go and do it and lets see how accurate the dang thing is or isn't.


Good point.

I did just that. The cocking piece moves if you push it with your hand, but if you cock and don't screw with it, it returns to the same place and stays there. My cocking piece starts to move downward when pulling the trigger, but the firing pin releases about the time I notice it move slightly.

I got around 3.5" groups at 100 yds with Privi 150 gr jsps shooting out of a bubba rifle with a home-crowned 20" barrel.

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp330/305178/Mosin002.jpg

[Hang Fire]

Years ago I scouted a FN 98 in 7.62x51. I decided it needed a back up sight so made up this poor boy aperture sight.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/TANSTAAFL-2/Scout2.jpg

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/PB_Sight1.JPG

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/PB_Sight2.JPG

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/Sight-mount.JPG

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/th_Front2_1_.jpg

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/Import_balard.jpg

[Hang Fire]

The main benefit of a farther rear mounted sight aperture is to increase the sight radius.. Unfortunately, all the benefit of increasing the sight radius is undone by making it wobbly... It's akin to using a broken scope because you don't like iron sights....

You can buy a commercial replacement peep aperture deal that replaces the existing sight ladder... I actually own the SKS model of the sight - it has a wheel you turn to do fine adjustment on vertical, and a screw to adjust side to side shift.... Works quite well... especially if you prefer a peep/ghost ring to a notch...

In the end.. Time and experience is the great winnowing fan.. and the cream rises to the top.... There are a TON of rifles out there with rear cocking pieces.... Hundreds of Millions made over the years...

Thanks

I mounted this 30 dollar air gun aperture sight with target knops on rear sight 12 mm dovetail as a back up on this little prebubbarized MN. It works great with a large aperture as a forward mounted ghost ring sight.

The scout scope is also mounted on the dovetail.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/TANSTAAFL-2/P1010360.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/TANSTAAFL-2/P1010313.jpg

[6.5x47]

came across this posting and can share that there are several target sight options for the mn on the ebay listed under mn sights.

[lemming]

Update on my post 2 years ago about mounting a Parker Hale aperture sight on my Mosin.

It works! Furthest I've shot with it is 600 yards; it certainly shoots no worse than my other target rifles. The long eye relief does take some getting used to, but it's not a serious problem.

So far I haven't found a load to match the accuracy of the PPU-Partizan factory ammo (which shoots sub-MoA at 100 yards in my rifle); it's expensive using only factory stuff here in the UK, so the search continues.

The purpose of the experiment was always to find out just how accurate the Mosin could be, if fitted with decent sights. The answer would seem to be that the accuracy is limited only by the ability (or lack of same) of the organic attachment on the back end of the stock.