K31 Accuracy compared to modern designs

Nåjd

Nåjd

Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Location
Lower Mainland
I was wondering if anyone could tell me what brand new or relatively recent firearm could compare to a good condition K31 from the new market?

Curious if they still represent a good value at their current price point.

Also if anyone hunts with a K31 I would love to hear some stories about how it had held up!
 
I don't believe the K31 is any more accurate with ammunition tailored for it than any other milsurp in the same condition.

I have taken pristine condition milsurps to the range and had several different shooters compare them, by shooting tailored ammo for each, off the bench at 100yd targets.

The idea was to compare groups, not shots on center bull. The center bull was used as an aiming point only. It's next to impossible to set the sights on a rifle for every different individual that shoots. it.

There was one fool that kept trying to apply "Kentucky windage" so that the POIs were close to center. He produced nothing but large groups, while everyone else produced groups in the 1 MOA range.

All of the rifles were stock milspec with no modifications to anything, including sights.

The rifles used for this comparison were a M96 swede, M91 Argentine, M93 Spanish, Gew 88, Brazil M1908, BYF Mauser 98, Longbranch No4 MkI*(1950), 1903A3 Springfield, M41 Carcano and a Type II Italian built rifle for Japan during WWII, which looks like the bastard child of a Carcano and Arisaka, M91 Mosin Nagant.

As mentioned, all of them were in pristine condition and that's why they were selected for the comparison. All the shooters, but one, were on the ball, lots of personal knowledge about the types of rifles and all shot those rifles very well.

The ammunition was all hand loaded with Hornady bullets, and once fired brass.

There was only one of each rifle. All were mine. That was the control factor for the comparison shoot.

It was a great day for all of us and in a couple of cases, opened a few eyes to the capabilities of these rifles in as new, unissued condition.
 
The OP wrote - 'I was wondering if anyone could tell me what brand new or relatively recent firearm could compare to a good condition K31 from the new market?'

This is a very difficult question to answer since -

1. the K31 dates from early 1932 and had no updates, TMK, to the design until production ceased sometime around 1957.

3. it can therefore only be compared with its contemporaries, using the same service issue ammunition from the time.

3. it was designed as a military, in-service, work-horse of a rifle, not MOA-all-day-long shooter. Just like all the other rifles mentioned in the post above.

To attempt a true comparison except under the like-for-like conditions I high-lighted is, to my mind, facile, especially using hand-loads that have been optimised by the hand-loader.

Contemporary service ammunition, or a true replication of it, NOT spiffy handloads - or no deal.
 
I would say the K31 is one of the most inherently accurate actions out there. Considering the world record for iron sight shooting was made with one, they are about as accurate as any rifle out there, except for some of these modern precision builds which take things to a whole new extreme.

The surplus ammo for the K31 (GP-11) is also basically match grade ammo across the board, in that regards it is also a step up over all its competitors.
 
tacfoley said:
The OP wrote - 'I was wondering if anyone could tell me what brand new or relatively recent firearm could compare to a good condition K31 from the new market?'

This is a very difficult question to answer since -

1. the K31 dates from early 1932 and had no updates, TMK, to the design until production ceased sometime around 1957.

3. it can therefore only be compared with its contemporaries, using the same service issue ammunition from the time.

3. it was designed as a military, in-service, work-horse of a rifle, not MOA-all-day-long shooter. Just like all the other rifles mentioned in the post above.

To attempt a true comparison except under the like-for-like conditions I high-lighted is, to my mind, facile, especially using hand-loads that have been optimised by the hand-loader.

Contemporary service ammunition, or a true replication of it, NOT spiffy handloads - or no deal.
Click to expand...


Sorry but surplus military ammo is to hit and miss between batches to make a proper comparison. Same goes for off the shelf commercial.

That being said, with relatively recent milspec, from present stock, the results would be the same over all the different rifles, all else quality wise being equal.
 
bearhunter said:
Sorry but surplus military ammo is to hit and miss between batches to make a proper comparison. Same goes for off the shelf commercial.

That being said, with relatively recent milspec, from present stock, the results would be the same over all the different rifles, all else quality wise being equal.
Click to expand...

Given that GP11 ammunition has never been 'hit and miss', I think that you've just shot the rest of your guns tested right in the head.

The K31, with its own never-varying quality GP11 ammunition, is untouchable by anything else of the same era shooting its correct ammunition.

We should agree to disagree, right?
 
tacfoley said:
Given that GP11 ammunition has never been 'hit and miss', I think that you've just shot the rest of your guns tested right in the head.

The K31, with its own never-varying quality GP11 ammunition, is untouchable by anything else of the same era shooting its correct ammunition.

We should agree to disagree, right?
Click to expand...


Not so. I have three different batches of GP11. The K31, which is in exc condition likes ONE of them and will give consistent two inch groups, the K11 is tolerant of all three but won't give me any better groups than three inches.

I pull the bullets and seat them out a little further, adjust the powder weight to what works for each rifle and then they will both group into MOA IF I DO MY PART.

Both rifles will shoot
 
Last edited:
Nåjd said:
I was wondering if anyone could tell me what brand new or relatively recent firearm could compare to a good condition K31 from the new market?

Curious if they still represent a good value at their current price point.

Also if anyone hunts with a K31 I would love to hear some stories about how it had held up!
Click to expand...

Might find this of some interest:

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1143157-K31-Ammunition-Question

I do suggest practicing with 22 rifles all of the non-supported shooting positions you are likely to use in your hunting area.
Rifle accuracy is one thing, shooter's competency is another. So many hunters can't hit a barn without support these days.
 
bearhunter said:
Not so. I have three different batches of GP11. The K31, which is in exc condition likes ONE of them and will give consistent two inch groups, the K11 is tolerant of all three but won't give me any better groups than three inches.

I pull the bullets and seat them out a little further, adjust the powder weight to what works for each rifle and then they will both group into MOA IF I DO MY PART.

Both rifles will shoot
Click to expand...

All you have done is to describe selectively handloading, shrug.

I can do that all day long. Ask Diopter.
 
It did ok, I think he was expecting a bit more and he diopter sights on the K31 isn’t for combat as he states.

[video]https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjJ74exvJTqAhVgHTQIHdVkAFIQwqsBMAJ6BAgJE As&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DrQ y2H7cvtHY&usg=AOvVaw36qJvFS6i9vNI2aHjy9s7P[/video]
 
diopter said:
Might find this of some interest:

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1143157-K31-Ammunition-Question

I do suggest practicing with 22 rifles all of the non-supported shooting positions you are likely to use in your hunting area.
Rifle accuracy is one thing, shooter's competency is another. So many hunters can't hit a barn without support these days.
Click to expand...


Thanks, I will look into this! My competency is pretty much non existent at this point, I’m trying to learn as much as I can.
 
Last edited:
I dunno about the K31, but as a G1911 owner, I make sure to post Capandball's video on it to friend's I'm trying to rope into picking one up (more brass can't hurt, lol)
https://youtu.be/JAHdnI2MIFs
I'd expect the K31 to preform similar or infinitesimally worse, since the barrel was cut and the bolt assembly was shortened, but is otherwise they're pretty alike. In either case though, I'd expect the skill of the shooter and the quality of ammunition to be the determining factor moreso than the innate accuracy of the design
 
bearhunter said:
I don't believe the K31 is any more accurate with ammunition tailored for it than any other milsurp in the same condition.

I have taken pristine condition milsurps to the range and had several different shooters compare them, by shooting tailored ammo for each, off the bench at 100yd targets.

The idea was to compare groups, not shots on center bull. The center bull was used as an aiming point only. It's next to impossible to set the sights on a rifle for every different individual that shoots. it.

There was one fool that kept trying to apply "Kentucky windage" so that the POIs were close to center. He produced nothing but large groups, while everyone else produced groups in the 1 MOA range.

All of the rifles were stock milspec with no modifications to anything, including sights.

The rifles used for this comparison were a M96 swede, M91 Argentine, M93 Spanish, Gew 88, Brazil M1908, BYF Mauser 98, Longbranch No4 MkI*(1950), 1903A3 Springfield, M41 Carcano and a Type II Italian built rifle for Japan during WWII, which looks like the bastard child of a Carcano and Arisaka, M91 Mosin Nagant.

As mentioned, all of them were in pristine condition and that's why they were selected for the comparison. All the shooters, but one, were on the ball, lots of personal knowledge about the types of rifles and all shot those rifles very well.

The ammunition was all hand loaded with Hornady bullets, and once fired brass.

There was only one of each rifle. All were mine. That was the control factor for the comparison shoot.

It was a great day for all of us and in a couple of cases, opened a few eyes to the capabilities of these rifles in as new, unissued condition.
Click to expand...

Good post which I generally agree with, but you said “any other milsurp”
I disagree with this. Some military rifles were extremely well made and were almost show pieces, including some in your list. I’m sure an Argentine 1891 would cost at least 3000$ to make today.
Not all military rifles were created equal. Think of a 91/30 with bad bedding and a 20 pound trigger and bored off center. Also some are very finicky and need lots of tweaking to shoot well. The average SMLE certainly wasn’t an MOA rifle even at its best. I’m surprised you got even a Longbranch to shoot MOA.
 
Sir Plus said:
Good post which I generally agree with, but you said “any other milsurp”
I disagree with this. Some military rifles were extremely well made and were almost show pieces, including some in your list. I’m sure an Argentine 1891 would cost at least 3000$ to make today.
Not all military rifles were created equal. Think of a 91/30 with bad bedding and a 20 pound trigger and bored off center. Also some are very finicky and need lots of tweaking to shoot well. The average SMLE certainly wasn’t an MOA rifle even at its best. I’m surprised you got even a Longbranch to shoot MOA.
Click to expand...

When it comes to accuracy, condition is everything.

I sold the sister rifle to the Longbranch last year. It was, other than the bore, still full of cosmolene.

I sold the rifle used in the test to one of the shooters in the test group. He hounded me for close to two years and finally gave me a price I couldn't turn down. I needed a new roof on my house as well

The rifle used for the shoot was one consecutive serial number previous. The quality of the post war LB rifles is excellent and likely were the best of the litter. The rifle I shot dad a pristine .311 bore, without any loose spots when a jag/patch was pushed through the bore.

As mentioned, other than the fool trying to apply Kentucky windage, all of the shooters were familiar with milsurps and were some of the best shooters I've had the privilege getting together with for a fun, non formal shoot.

One other thing, other than being stripped down properly, one time, then assembled properly, making sure all action screws were properly torqued to factory spec.

When milsurps get into the clutches of neophytes, things usually go awry with that first strip down and tolerances aren't put back together properly.
 
If you want comparative accuracy reports on a variety of rifles check out 9 Hole Reviews on Youtube/Full 30. It might surprise you which Milsurp was most accurate. They also compile all of their results in a spreadsheet for easy reference. In keeping with the fact that they mostly shoot military rifles, the targets are quite large, but they do shoot out to 500 with most of them, which most folks never do.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsrKsXEAqCbZyVrCibkgpwQ
 
Last edited:
Sir Plus said:
Good post which I generally agree with, but you said “any other milsurp”
I disagree with this. Some military rifles were extremely well made and were almost show pieces, including some in your list. I’m sure an Argentine 1891 would cost at least 3000$ to make today.
Not all military rifles were created equal. Think of a 91/30 with bad bedding and a 20 pound trigger and bored off center. Also some are very finicky and need lots of tweaking to shoot well. The average SMLE certainly wasn’t an MOA rifle even at its best. I’m surprised you got even a Longbranch to shoot MOA.
Click to expand...

All internet shooters are MOA!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom