M1891/30 Questions - For Experts

Zaicheka

New member
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
Vancouver
Hi, can those of you Nagant experts tell me, which manufacturers made M1891/30 rifles with full (not laminated) stock and with one piece (not split/two-piece) wood stocks? Also can you tell me which manufacturer made the best quality M1891/30s (in terms of metal & wood usage), the Tula or Izhevsk, or were there others? Thank you and my apologies for so many questions, I'm just ready to buy one, and although I am willing to spend more, I hope to buy one that is really good in quality. Thank you, please educate me :)
 
You're going to find varying degrees of quality from either Tula or Izhevsk rifles and I would advise that you inspect and find a rifle that fits what you want based more on "I am looking for a 91/30" than "I am looking for an izhevsk 1923."

That being said, octagonal receivers tend to be more collectible than round receivers.
 
You will find laminated and spliced stocks on all Mosin Nagant 1891/30 rifles because they were virtually all refurbished and all types were captured by the Finns (who installed two piece stocks). Also there are some wartime Soviet rifles that have used stocks with significant repairs/splices to the buttstock in order to conserve material.

There is little difference in quality between manufacturers. Wartime manufacturing conditions may mean rough finishes on the metal, but there are no models or manufacturers that have a poor reputation, unlike the World War I Mosin Nagants. They are all good quality.
 
Find a cheap one that's in mechanical good shape and shoots well, get a reloading kit and enjoy it at the range. Save enough money to buy a second one from the other arsenal just to compare.

I guess it depends what you're buying it for. Even the cheap ones can end up having a great bore and shoot good, maybe need a bit of shellac to make them look nicer...

Then get a M44, then the others... :)
 
Find a pre 1941 Tula or Izhevsk, preferably with a dark stock and the screwed in stock ferules (as well as the usually desirable stamped, matching numbers). Well struck stock cartouches are a bonus.

There are a few out there like this from the recent imports.
 
Last edited:
stock ferules

Also known as sling eustacians. Wartime examples have varying types, most of them not screwed in, but folded over and made of brass usually. The screwed ones look a little bit nicer but this feature would in no way affect my choice of rifle.

It's true that any rifle made during peacetime will be of better finish, but this is not really an indicator of overall superiority since the rifles all had to be able to shoot and function well to win the war. I appreciate wartime examples just as much as pre-war examples and would consider them of the same "quality". Plus almost all rifles have been refurbished putting them on a much more equal playing field.
 
You will find laminated and spliced stocks on all Mosin Nagant 1891/30 rifles because they were virtually all refurbished and all types were captured by the Finns (who installed two piece stocks). Also there are some wartime Soviet rifles that have used stocks with significant repairs/splices to the buttstock in order to conserve material.

There is little difference in quality between manufacturers. Wartime manufacturing conditions may mean rough finishes on the metal, but there are no models or manufacturers that have a poor reputation, unlike the World War I Mosin Nagants. They are all good quality.

Sorry but I find both of your statements untrue... I've come up across M91/30s and handled one-piece full stock, so I know they are out there. Also I checked out some Mosin-Nagant sites, as well as told by some owners that compared with Tula, Izhevsk made rifles poorer in quality and finish, especially during 1943, so there are differences in quality.
 
Also known as sling eustacians. Wartime examples have varying types, most of them not screwed in, but folded over and made of brass usually. The screwed ones look a little bit nicer but this feature would in no way affect my choice of rifle.

It's true that any rifle made during peacetime will be of better finish, but this is not really an indicator of overall superiority since the rifles all had to be able to shoot and function well to win the war. I appreciate wartime examples just as much as pre-war examples and would consider them of the same "quality". Plus almost all rifles have been refurbished putting them on a much more equal playing field.

Or escutcheons...:)
 
Sorry but I find both of your statements untrue... I've come up across M91/30s and handled one-piece full stock, so I know they are out there. Also I checked out some Mosin-Nagant sites, as well as told by some owners that compared with Tula, Izhevsk made rifles poorer in quality and finish, especially during 1943, so there are differences in quality.

Oh my. Learn to read.
 
Hi, can those of you Nagant experts tell me, which manufacturers made M1891/30 rifles with full (not laminated) stock and with one piece (not split/two-piece) wood stocks? Also can you tell me which manufacturer made the best quality M1891/30s (in terms of metal & wood usage), the Tula or Izhevsk, or were there others? Thank you and my apologies for so many questions, I'm just ready to buy one, and although I am willing to spend more, I hope to buy one that is really good in quality. Thank you, please educate me :)

There is so much issues here, that it's hard really to tell. Some say get pre-war rifle... but that rifle would face 4 years of war and may be in crappy condition... So the best case here is grab, see, and buy policy. Many people just get a rifle and refinish it (most rifles were refinished in 50s anyway and it was done quickly with pure quality).
 
Sorry but I find both of your statements untrue... I've come up across M91/30s and handled one-piece full stock, so I know they are out there. Also I checked out some Mosin-Nagant sites, as well as told by some owners that compared with Tula, Izhevsk made rifles poorer in quality and finish, especially during 1943, so there are differences in quality.

If you knew the answers to your questions, why did you ask them?

Get a copy of Lapin's book and all will be answered.
 
The guy is obviously a newb and you guys weren't too helpful. To answer your simple question about quality, in terms of snipers Tula made ones are considered higher quality. Tula only made about 30,000 PU's as opposed to Izhezsk that made over 150,000. An arsenal that makes only 1/5 of the rifles in the same time period as another arsenal would almost suredly be better quality. They are obviously more collectible and sought after as well. You can go get yourself a prewar hexagonal but again ask yourself why you want a 91/30. I wanted a 91/30 PU because of it's history. Probably the most effective rifle of WWII. Not to mention it shot people in the head. I have a 1944 Tula that probably saw less that 3 months of action. Its in unbelievable shape. The bore looks like it was made yesterday
 
Best overall choice would be a rifle made between 1926 and 1931 during relatively trouble-free time in the USSR (NEP - New Economic Policy). Having said this the actual rifle must be inspected for bore/chamber problems.

s>
 
Hi, can those of you Nagant experts tell me, which manufacturers made M1891/30 rifles with full (not laminated) stock and with one piece (not split/two-piece) wood stocks? Also can you tell me which manufacturer made the best quality M1891/30s (in terms of metal & wood usage), the Tula or Izhevsk, or were there others? Thank you and my apologies for so many questions, I'm just ready to buy one, and although I am willing to spend more, I hope to buy one that is really good in quality. Thank you, please educate me :)

Hmm... some good info in this thread, along with some misinformation. Let me try to clear things up for you somewhat.

For starters, there are only three ww2 era manufacturers of the M1891/30. They are:
-Tula
-Izhevsk
-Tikka (Finland).

There are other rifles around from ww2 from other makers, but in general, these are Finnish creations using cannibalized barrels from earlier rifle makers that never made the M91/30.

Both Tula and Izhevsk made the M1891/30 with 1 piece stocks. Both also made the M91/30 with 2 piece, 3 piece and laminated stocks at one time or another.

Tikka made the M1891/30 with either captured Russian stocks or newly made 2-piece stocks joined just behind the rear band with a finger-splice. No Tikka has ever surfaced with a laminate stock.

In general, it is accepted that ww2 laminate stocks were issued with the Carbines (i.e. M38 and M44). Virtually all laminate M1891/30 stocks you are likely to encounter were fitted to their respective rifles POST-WAR during a rebuild.

In general, the only non-refurbished M1891/30 rifles you are likely to encounter in Canada (or in the US for that matter) are Finnish captured rifles from ww2. These guns may or may not be Finn marked. Not all Finn captured rifles were refurbished which accounts for the originals that are around.

M1891/30's tat have recently been imported are all from either Balkan states or the Ukraine. They have ALL (yes, every last one of them) been refurbished. This refurbishment program was a public works project in the Soviet Union circa 1960's and 1970's. Some of the rifles we see are on their 3rd or 4th refurb, as refurb programs also took place during ww2 and in the decades between ww2 and the comprehensive rebuild program of the 60's ad 70's.

The commonly available refurbs had mixed parts. PERIOD. Sometimes (rarely) bolts may be originals to the receivers (it takes a trained eye and lots of experience seeing refurbed bolt bodies to spot the difference). Barrels are generally the originals. The rest of the parts are most certainly random replacements from the bin and the majority of the bolt bodies are renumbered.

Start of production for the Soviet M891/30 was June 10, 1930. Rifles prior to that date started life as M1891 Dragoon rifles and may subsequently have been updated to the M1891/30 standard. Tikka started production in 1944. The M1891/30 receiver was changed from octagonal (erroneously referred to as "hex" receivers) in 1936 at both Izhevsk and Tula, while both types were used at Tikka throughout production. Production quality remained equal and of high standard at all factories until the spring of 1941.

June 22, 1941 marked the German invasion of the USSR. Production shortcuts were immediately implemented and the fit and finish of all M1891/30 rifles fell off dramatically until the second half of 1944 when it started to gradually improve. The worst year for production quality at both Soviet factories was 1942.

Much is made of production quality differences between Tula and Izhevsk. This is total BUNK. Both factories produced rifles to the same standard throughout production and quality lowered as the government relaxed specifications to speed production. If you want a top quality rifle, sick to 1940 and earlier or a 1945 dated example. Octagona receivers are more collectable and Tula rifles are more collectible than Izhevsk because Tula made less of them in most years. Tula rifles also have nicer markings in term of aesthetics.

The rarest M1891/30 rifles are 1941 Tulas. Tula began making the SVT40 that year and so made very few 91/30's. Additionally, the plant was moved which slowed production dramatically.

I hope that helps.
 
For more info that may be of help, take a look at the milsurps.com Milsurp Knowledge Library section on Russian firearms.

For example, here we have a typical refurb 1940 Izhevsk M1891/30:
http://milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=174

And here is a typical NON-refurb 1941 Izhevsk M1891/30:
http://milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=579

These two rifles were made at the same factory only a few months apart. Both would be considered "pre-war" production as the 1941 shows none of the production shortcuts brought about after the war started for Russia.

Should give a good idea of the differences between a refurb and a non-refurb, as well a a good indication of the between pre-war production quality.
 
You're going to find varying degrees of quality from either Tula or Izhevsk rifles and I would advise that you inspect and find a rifle that fits what you want based more on "I am looking for a 91/30" than "I am looking for an izhevsk 1923."

That being said, octagonal receivers tend to be more collectible than round receivers.

... just a small point, but in 1923, Izhevsk was only manufacturing M1891 Three Line rifles and M1891 Dragoon rifles.

Anything looking like an M1891/30 dated 1923 would be a refurbished and converted dragoon rifle.
 
Also known as sling eustacians. Wartime examples have varying types, most of them not screwed in, but folded over and made of brass usually. The screwed ones look a little bit nicer but this feature would in no way affect my choice of rifle.

No rifles ever left a Russian arsenal with brass escutcheons that I am aware of. the only brass parts on a Russian M1891/30 are on some pre-war handguards, the tip re-inforcements are sometimes sheet brass.

"brass" looking escutcheons are invariably steel painted over with shellac which can sometimes look like brass depending on the shellac tint.

Cheers.
 
Back
Top Bottom