mosin nagant vs lee enfield

Seriously now,
This discussion is becoming more and more about action strength.
If that's the case the nod goes to neither of them. We all know which of the wartime action designs is the strongest (the one that's done WW1, WW2, and is now launching out 458 win mag as a dangerous game rifle) it is fact, the Mauser 98 is the pinnacle of bolt design, period.

The LE has superb sights and the convenience of a 10 round box mag and is a fine rifle that has stood the test of time again and again.

The Mosin is a tough reliable rifle that will keep working no matter the conditions and follows the soviet motto: Make it work, make it cheap, make lots.

If I had to pick a bolt action rifle besides the 98, give me the Mosin with the LE's sights;)
 
And in regards to how fast an Enfield bolt is over a Mosin, I would like to openly challenge someone to a race in the cycling of the bolt. My 42' Izhevsk 91/30 is the fastest bolt action I have ever worked in my life. Yes, I own or have owned a '43 K98, a '42 Longbrach No4 and several other bolt action rifles, and nothing touches my 1942 Izhevsk 91/30. There has been nothing special done to this rifle, it is a standard Soviet refurb rifle, even a mismatched bolt to boot!
 
Last edited:
J996 said:
Seriously now,
We all know which of the wartime action designs is the strongest (the one that's done WW1, WW2, and is now launching out 458 win mag as a dangerous game rifle) it is fact, the Mauser 98 is the pinnacle of bolt design, period.
Click to expand...

Hey no one said you could bring the K98 into the competition :p No ones insulting the Mauser! :D
Its like bringing a sports car into a dump truck race!
 
RRCo. said:
The MN was designed to work in Russia, the Lee Enfield was designed to work in an empire that included every kind of terrain in the world; about 25% of the earth's surface around 1900.

QUOTE]

Hmm, seems to me that the Mosin worked fairly well in Russia, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, China, N.Korea, S.Korea, N.Vietnam, S. Vietnam, the US, France, Finnland, Czechoslovakia, The Ukraine, Japan, Belgium, Spain, Albania, Yugoslavia, Syria, Bulgaria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Cambodia, Loas, Borneo, Valogda, Turkey, Austria, Serbia, Italy, Grenada, Ireland, Egypt, Somalia, Manchuria, Thailand, and Im pretty sure there working pretty good here in Canada - just to name a few!

In there we have extreamly cold winters, extreamly hot/wet jungles, extreamly hot/dry deserts, mountains, jungles, swamps, bogs, fields, mud, dirt, snow, salt water, fresh water, grass, valleys, ice, wastelands etc... and of course they survived urban areas fairly well (Berlin, Moscow, Stalingrad, Kiev etc...)
Click to expand...
 
ArtyMan said:
RRCo. said:
The MN was designed to work in Russia, the Lee Enfield was designed to work in an empire that included every kind of terrain in the world; about 25% of the earth's surface around 1900.

QUOTE]

Hmm, seems to me that the Mosin worked fairly well in Russia, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, China, N.Korea, S.Korea, N.Vietnam, S. Vietnam, the US, France, Finnland, Czechoslovakia, The Ukraine, Japan, Belgium, Spain, Albania, Yugoslavia, Syria, Bulgaria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Cambodia, Loas, Borneo, Valogda, Turkey, Austria, Serbia, Italy, Grenada, Ireland, Egypt, Somalia, Manchuria, Thailand, and Im pretty sure there working pretty good here in Canada - just to name a few!
Click to expand...

And all over the world with the German Navy.....:)
Click to expand...
 
M/N is pretty fun if you can get ammo, shoots good; I've got a 30/91. Fairly tame recoil, lots of power; heck the trigger isn't even bad.
L/E is faster to cycle ( IMO ) and put rounds on target. Recoil and noise are pretty much the same; at least in the rifles. I've seen lots of Bubba'd L/E ( 100 $ ) that shot great, but the ammo is pricey.
The remove-able clip is a bonus on the L/E; and the jamming arguement... if you can't figure out how to load rds with-out getting the rims aligned wrong... nothing more needs to be said.
Oh and as far as operating in adverse conditions; didn't the British weapons trials include dropping the weapon into a mud filled pit; after which the weapon was wiped off by hand and expected to function?
L/E guys would be the experts on this.
I'm working from memory here; but...an English gunnery sergeant named Snoxall( spelling ?) in the 1930's put 38 rds into a 2' target @ 250 yds in 1 minute. Wow! Once again working from memory because I'm at work and the book is at home. ' Worlds greatest Rifles ' I believe.
It was a very impressive feat none-the-less
 
Last edited:
Calum said:
To say Mosins only work in Russia overlooks the many wars were they have been used with great success from Jungle to Desert conditions.

And once again, the cartridge interrupter...

[youtube]FXRY2j3RaUs[/youtube]

Something the Enfield design could have benefited from.
Click to expand...

:confused: I never said they only work in Russia, I said they were designed to, and then only in response to a previous comment, which was largely irrelevant anyway, as obviously very few if any firearms are designed for one geographic area.

The cartridge interrupter: impossible in a double stacked magazine. Why is it necessary? To stop the rims catching on each other? Just have to fill your clips and mag the right way.
 
ArtyMan said:
Well if my rifle was immersed in water, the last thing I would want to have to do is unscrew something, shake the water out and find a nice fire to dry it off with, hopefully all before the rifle was needed for combat. If the Mosin gets wet its simple, pull the trigger, cycle out the spent round, and give er another- too easy, no dissasembly or searching for a nice fire!

We were discussing the the necessity of stripping the bolt, or the lack thereof. If my No4 went swimming and I was in combat or on the battle field, I wouldn't bother to remove the bolt or bolt head either. It's not necessary if they are well greased/oiled they won't rust, being parkerized, unlike the 'in the white' MN bolt. One cycle of the bolt and pin and most of the water is snapped out anyway. Complete non-issue.

True the Enfield bolt can be wiped down a bit faster then the Mosin bolt, but the Enfield bolt will NEED to be wiped down, whereas the Mosin wont - she will keep going, regardless of how hard the crevaces are too get too (which there not at all, try a round with a patch wrapped around the bullet - just saying). Oh, OK. I'll take your word for it. Faith always helps they say!;)

With the tiny little bump of the rifles muzzle end the bedding can be all shot throwing your rounds like a mall ninja with a 12 guage. Where as I have seen several Mosins dropped and the only thing that needed to be done, was bend down and pick em up. Good grief. Where did you get that from? I'm sensing a lack of understanding of the process whereby firearms are trialed and approved for service, at least British or Canadian service. Maybe go down the Legion next Remembrance Day and ask some vets if their No4 Lee Enfields would do that. What do you think?

Dont get me wrong, the Enfield has MORE then proved itself over time, and is among one of the finest battle rifles ever designed, but, over a Mosin in terms of reliability, simplicity, ease of everything, durability and overall badass ness, well, the Mosin wins
Click to expand...
Hm, well, I can't help with "badass'ness", isn't that all about Harley Davidsons, Rayban Wayfarers and goatees or something? :rolleyes: Bullets kill "badasses" the same as they do anything else...only they enjoy it more.

 
I like the Nagants because my Grandparents were Finnish and they used them. Do I have to pick one based on each rifle's merits? Can't I just make an emotional decision?
 
In regards to the military trials and my "lack of understanding" - what may or may not have been tested when the rifles first rolled off the production line is irrellivent. The fact remains that nowadays you can see multiple posts on peoples issues with the Enfields, most of which are bedding problems, caused by wood shrinkage. Although this can be problematic will all milsurps, the Enfield seems to suffer the most, probably due to its heavy reliance upon proper bedding. The Mosin does not seem to be too affected by this ailment. And in regards to your comment about going down to the Legion and talking to the veterans - maybe they did, maybe they didnt 70 years ago, but the fact remains, it is an issue today that plagues many Enfields. Yes it can be fixed, and it will bring the rifle back to excellent accuracy, but it is a plague none the less - which the Mosin dosnt seem to suffer from, at least not as bad.
 
well since I have a good assortment of both enfields and nagants
long lee, No1, No4, No5 and a few others
M91, M91/24, M91/30, M44, and a few otheres

I can say I've shot hundreds of rounds from these rifles. I would pick the Enfield over the Nagant.

The Enfield is just a better rifle. The Brits did learn a few things in the Boer war and studied all the current designs at the time when they were sorting out the Enfield design. They also continued to improve on the design as time went on, there are a lot of differences between the No1 action and No4 action and tehre were a lot of trials that were conducted before the design changes were adopted.

The Nagant.... not so much so... there were the hexigon receiver and the round receiver not a lot of variation and progress there as the internals are still mostly the same. If I recall there were some variations in the bolt that were not interchangeable. The Finns did improve the trigger on some of their rebuilds. But the safety is a pain to use.

There is just no way that the Nagant is a better soldiers rifle then the Enfield.
 
Let's keep one thing straight: I'm not knocking the MN. I own several and like them. They're fun.

But if it were MY butt on the line, I would take the Lee.

BTW, what's this about the MN being an older design? The Lee dates from 1879, the MN from 1891 only.

As far as absolute strength is concerned, the champ is the 1910 Ross. It was tested once at 120,000 PSI, which I sure as heck wouldn't put through any of my Mausers!

Acra-Glas is a fibreglass bedding compound. Does absolute miracles for bum stocks. They sell it with some weird stuff for a parting compound, but I use a thin coat of grease instead (Esso Unitol works fine and is easy to see to wipe off, being a pretty blue), get a tighter job, I think..... but that's my opinion.

After extensive testing over the past 4 years, my buddy and I have come to the conclusion that the MN is best haldloaded with the same slugs as the .303": .312 or, failing availability, .311. Leave the .308s for your Garand. On the other hand, the MN does tolerate BT slugs better than the majority of .303s.

Most important point: have fun. That's what we're all here for.
 
ratherbefishin said:
what advantages, if any does a mosin nagant have over a Lee Enfield,other than just preference?They seem ballistically similar,what about workmanship, accuracy,as well as availabilty,price and variety of ammunition?[someone has a nice Polish mosin nagant for sale on EE for $100]
Click to expand...

From a design perspective

Advantages:
1. Two Action Screws
2. Less expensive to manufacture
3. Longer Site radius
4. Simple design that works

Disadvantages:
I don't have enough time to list them all.
 
IMHO the two Disadvantages the Mosin has compared to the LE are:

1. The Safety; especially if using it for hunting.

2. Mag capacity of 5 compared to the 10 of the LE... although I think the Mosin feeds more reliably...:nest:
 
Ryan j said:
IMHO the two Disadvantages the Mosin has compared to the LE are:

1. The Safety; especially if using it for hunting.

2. Mag capacity of 5 compared to the 10 of the LE... although I think the Mosin feeds more reliably...:nest:
Click to expand...

I agree with the mag capacity, I also agree that with a bit of practice those stripper clips can be worked faster then any No4 mag change or No4 stripper clips
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom