Question about 1930 Mosin 91/30 Pics added

L

leeaspell

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Location
AB
Tried searching this but hard to get a refined search involving a mosin lol. I got a mosin made in 1930, but it says 1930R. Does this mean it is a refurb? It was made in Izhevsk, hex reciever, serial number 284**
 
leeaspell said:
Tried searching this but hard to get a refined search involving a mosin lol. I got a mosin made in 1930, but it says 1930R. Does this mean it is a refurb? It was made in Izhevsk, hex reciever, serial number 284**
Click to expand...
Nope, the "r" is cyrillic caracter mean " in the year" so your mosin is stamped 1930r or if you prefer built in the year 1930:)
Jocelyn
 
All mosins are fun and cool and the octagon recievers tend to be better finished because the germans weren't breathing down the factories necks.
 
The 91/30 specs included a round receiver, the "short" barrel and post-and-U-notch sights. One with an octagonal frame and 91/30-length barrel should properly be termed a 91 Dragoon Rifle or, if the s/n starts with KA3, a Cossack Rifle.

Ineresting point is regarding the receiver. MNs have their factory info on the BARREL, so it could be a factory rebuild of an older frame. Check the frame for date.

This one sounds interestng!
.

What looks like an "r" is actually a GAMMA, standing in for "goda": "issue". You find the same thing on coins; I'm looking at a silver ruble right now marked "1897r". Very pretty. I'm sure your rifle is likewise.
.
 
Here's a picture showing the difference in finish between a 1942 Izhevsk 91/30 and a 1936 Tula 91/30. This is the most dramatic example of rough finish I've seen. The Germans must have been kicking the door down when this 42 was hacked out. I personally think it makes the 42 special because it bears witness to the conflict at hand. It also shows the difference between high and low wall receivers. The date of the frame will be on the underside of the tang behind the screw hole that holds the trigger group to the action.

rough002.jpg


rough001.jpg
 
Thanks, Chumlee - very interesting side-by-side comparison.

The 1943 Ishvesk I picked up for $100 (thanks, Westrifle) looks like it was chewed into rough shape by angry beavers. Plenty of "Fritz is coming" went into that one...
 
AH HA. I've got a 42 Tula (round) that looks the same as Chumlee's '36 (but mine still has a high wall). This is because during the war Tula maintained their pre-war finishing standards. But this comes down to production numbers.

"the M91/30s though, the total production at Tula is outnumbered by the 1942 and 1943 Izhevsk production alone. When production numbers for all years are considered, only one in three M91/30s is a Tula."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom