Refurbished Mosin Nagant - what it mens

[marc_j]

I have looked fairly hard for a complete description of the Mosin refurbishment process but so far all I have found are bits and pieces. Since I can't find one I will speculate what the process involved and what it means to owners. For those who don't want to read the whole post it means if you have purchased a refurbished rifle, it has been assembled from conforming parts. "Conforming" means inspected and passed some defined criteria. Don't buy a replacement part on EBay etc. to fix a problem because it probably won't.

The first "refurbishment" would have been shortly after the end of WW2 (GPW). It would have involved millions of rifles. The task had to be organized as an assembly line with unskilled labour completing simple steps. Acceptance criteria would in the form of simple gauging. Components subject to wear would be gauged and judged OK or NG. Parts that are dimensionally "to spec" are by definition interchangeable. Where, or when, the part was made makes no difference to fit or function.

It probably went like this...

At receiving..
Non serialized parts (barrel bands, retainers, sights) would be removed from the incoming rifles, inspected and the good ones piled into bins.
Bolt assemblies were separated from the receivers to be disassembled to allow inspection of the components. Accepted bolts have their original serial numbers ground off.
Serialized parts (barrel, receiver, floor plate and butt plate) were kept together during the cleaning and inspection process. (more efficient than removing and re-stamping serial numbers)
Separated stocks would be cleaned and repaired as necessary

Re-assembly
Serialized parts (that passed inspection) are reassembled into stocks (randomly so all combinations or pre-, wartime and post war stocks are mated to pre- and wartime receivers).
Bolt assemblies are made up randomly from conforming extractors, heads cocking pieces etc. and the serial number (or partial number) are stamped into the bolt body. All combinations of arsenal and pre-1928, post 1928 marks are possible.
Stock bands, retainers, and sights are assembled randomly on a one each basis (no distinction for arsenal or type).

The scenario I describe above seems to me to be the best explanation of how a pre 1928 Izhevsk extractor finds onto way onto a Tula bolt head with a Izhevsk cocking piece. All this in a 1937 Tula with Izhevsk stock bands and one wartime retainer (Tula) and one pre-war retainer (Izhevsk).

Very few bolts are "not matching". I have a "matching" Westinghouse bolt on a 1938 Tula - you can just make out on digit that was not completely ground off. Westrifle has quite a few Mosins for sale with re-numbered floor plates. This is presumably because they are "orphans" and there is not enough material to allow the original serial number to be ground off (or they choose to skip the expense of rebluing).

It is generally agreed that there were several refurbishments. The first had the goal to preserve all the rifles with useable life so the acceptance criteria were probably pretty loose. Later refurbishments, as ample supplies of SKSs and AKs were available, probably were intended to preserve only the best condition rifles. Separating the best from the rest involves tightening acceptance criteria.

Bottom line is that the parts that make up these rifles have been inspected multiple times. It is very unlikely that a problem with your Mosin is the result of a n.g. part. Most likely any problem you encounter is the result of careless reassembly or the need for very minor fitting. Don't buy replacement parts unless you are truly convinced that the part you have is no good.

Hope this helps someone to save a buck.

 

[Old Ranger]

Good advice on the parts replacement comment. I picked up a nice 91/30 at a local CTC last winter for a discounted price because it had been returned as it would not eject fired brass. I really wanted it for the brass hardware on the handguard. Thought I might have to replace the ejector which would not have been a big deal. Discovered that the ejector was fine and it just needed some cosmoline cleaned up. Worked fine after that. A nice rifle at a very nice price.

 

[johnny the boy]

That is great info on the 91/30. Just picked up a 1940 Mosin for $160.00 when I was in Halifax at [ www.thearmynavystore.net ] .Great staff that are into milsurp too.Got into the gun cage after showing PAL lots-o-stuff to see . Buddy mentioned he had shooter grade Nagants out back and he brought me out a very nice 1940 Tula with excellent matching #s metal but a refirb stock [ box with slash ] The sell point for me was that the bayonete has the matching ser# too. Also came with cleaning kit and guage but no sling or oil bottle.

 

[marc_j]

One thing I forgot. The sighting in concept of the Mosin Nagant is to remove material from the forward underside edge of the rear sight slider. For the most part this makes these parts disposable at refurbishment (they are custom fit to the rifle). Most refurbished Mosins have either pristine or only very lightly filed slides (usually blued). Since the sliders aren't filed, the refurbishment process did not include sighting. If you get one that is filed (bluing removed) it might mean it has be sighted in, or it might have been carelessly recycled. You won't know until you get it to the range.

Most Mosins (all but one of mine) will shoot 8-15 inches high at 100 yards. The design requires that every rifle will need some amount of material removed. How much depends on the rifle itself. Online you can find people who have added shrink tube to the fore sight to lower the point of impact - these people want to preserve the rifle as it is.

I want the rifle to shoot where it is supposed to. I follow the same process that the arsenal would have followed. Fire groups of 3 or 5 and remove a little bit of material at a time to get the MPI where you want it. This is a pretty slow process when done with a file because you have to remove the sight each time. I guess that the arsenals used a series of shims and preset cutters to do this because they couldn't possibly have produced 10,000 rifles per day using the hand method.

Of course remember that is easier to take material off than try to put it back on. You get 2 chances because you can turn the slide 180 - it won't look right but it will work fine.

 

[desporterizer]

Or, you could have the rifle in the same configurating the soviets did when sighted and mount the bayo. Where are you getting your info?

 

[marc_j]

From a sample of 14 rifles (1928-1944) all purchased either in cosmoline or from the box they came in from Russia. The chain of custody means that that my sample has not been modified except as it was done in the USSR. I am interested in how these rifles were made and how the manufacturing methods and practices accelerated to produce 3.5 million per year (1943) from a 10th of that number in the pre-war years. (I work in mass production manufacturing where the constant challenge is to increase production rates and reduce piece costs). I am systematically (sort of ) measuring dimensional characteristics and examining surface features. At some point I will be smart enough to figure how to post pictures.

There are lots of people with only one or two Mosins. When I bought my first one it was rough a hell chambering and extracting. My first question was, "Are they all this bad?" Having only one, I had nothing to compare it to, Now I have a large enough sample to say that some are silky smooth (not a Tikka, but better than my Savages) and some are brutal. I am looking for characteristics that are responsible for the "bad" ones. For the purists that think you should accept whatever the refurbishment dished out, don't read my posts. For the people who want their rifle to perform as the design intended (and as it did when it was in service) I hope to provide some practical advice so you get the most for your money.

To the question...

Mass production involves building a final assembly from a collection of parts all of which have nominal dimensions and tolerances. In theory, an assembly made up entirely of nominal parts will produce a net built that exactly performs as designed. In practice this rarely happens. Tolerance "stacking" is the accumulation of small departures from nominal which result is a shift from the intended outcome. Either you accept the departure in the finished product, or you design a system of nullifying these errors by calibration.

The method chosen was to restore nominal performance was grinding as I describe. The surface that is ground is the one that engages the base which is calibrated for range - an adjustment on this surface maintains is the offset to nominal through the entire 2000 metre range. The shape of the site base corresponds to the trajectory of the bullet which is independent of the rifle.

The grinding that is present is very different from the surface finish of the rest of the part (both roughness and orientation). If this was not the method used, there is no explanation for the secondary grinding operation that you see on many sight bases (flip yours over an look).

I have read several places (without reference to primary source) that the Mosin was sighted with the bayonet fixed (extended or stored isn't specified). I think this might have been the case up to 1918 but I am skeptical that the practice was carried on through the second world war. The day of the bayonet charge was over. The Mosin is clumsy enough without the bayonet. If you have the bayonet fixed then you are not concerned with the MPI at 300 metres and you wouldn't fix your bayonet to fire at targets at 300 metres. I doubt the arsenals would reach a different conclusion.

Adding the mass of the bayonet to the end of the barrel would certainly change the harmonics but not necessarily in a good way. It is a clearance fit between the barrel OD and the bayonet ID - a wobbling mass on the end of a rifle barrel is not going to increase precision.

 

[Claven2]

I have to disagree. Most likely period photos show the 91/30 with bayonet affixed. There is also no issue scabbard.

 

[desporterizer]

I have to disagree. Most likely period photos show the 91/30 with bayonet affixed. There is also no issue scabbard.

Exactly ! Every photo or movie that doesn't look staged shows the bayo ready to stick at a moments notice.

As for sighting, rough elevation achieved by filing rear sight adjuster, fine elevation by filing the front sight post. I am surprised with all the rifles you have examined you have not observed a lack of bluing on the front sight post on at least some of them.

The sum up you previous posts, the quality of refurbs varies due to wear, poor assembly, and poor initial machining. BTW, the Russians may have been doing some cleaning & fitting quite recently too.

 

[Claven2]

Some period pics from a quick search.

http://1.bp.########.com/-lQnN6U_1rv4/TtqzKW3EXkI/AAAAAAAABFg/koT5NeL0Mqc/s1600/Soviet_infantry.jpg

I'm not saying it never happened in WW2 battles, but a 10 minute goole search turned up exactly ZERO period photos with the bayonet removed from the 91/30.

 

[marc_j]

The front sights do differ in dimension so if you rifle shoots low you can remove material to raise the MPI. If the rifle shoots high you can't add material to the front sight (except by the "shrink tube" I described in my original post) or by buying another front sight and hoping it was not previously shortened (good luck).
My sample of rifles all (but one) shoot high. I will try adding the bayonet to see if it changes the MPI. It might but I am skeptical; the bending force created by addition of 1 Kg to the barrel seems hardly enough.
I knew there would be more knowledgeable people with respect to actual practice in WW2. None of the pictures show combat. Since several people have pointed out that there was never a scabbard issued for the bayonet, where/how else would you carry your bayonet when you were marching? Somebody will prove me wrong but pictures of Soviet snipers don't show bayonets - accuracy would be their primary concern.

 

[desporterizer]

The front sights do differ in dimension so if you rifle shoots low you can remove material to raise the MPI. If the rifle shoots high you can't add material to the front sight (except by the "shrink tube" I described in my original post) or by buying another front sight and hoping it was not previously shortened (good luck).
My sample of rifles all (but one) shoot high. I will try adding the bayonet to see if it changes the MPI. It might but I am skeptical; the bending force created by addition of 1 Kg to the barrel seems hardly enough.
I knew there would be more knowledgeable people with respect to actual practice in WW2. None of the pictures show combat. Since several people have pointed out that there was never a scabbard issued for the bayonet, where/how else would you carry your bayonet when you were marching? Somebody will prove me wrong but pictures of Soviet snipers don't show bayonets - accuracy would be their primary concern.

Sniper 91/30 are the only exception to the bayo rule & they are the only rifles that where originally sighted sans bayo. If you have not tried your 91/30s with the bayo on, you can expect the result show in this pic. This was shot with surplus at 100 yards.

 

[762shooter]

The last MN I bought had a ridiculously high front sight and it appeared to be new. My conclusion was that it must have been intended to be filed down in the field to adjust for elevation.

 

[desporterizer]

The front sight might be recycled but the pin is replaceable so it can be used on any rifle regardless of rear sight condition.

 

[Claven2]

Anyone with a lathe can readily make a new front sight post for a 91/30. When you drift out the front sight, the pin drifts out the bottom of the globe by punching it out through the hole on the top of the globe.

Personally, if I were going to adjust a 91/30, I would consider a combination of both fling the rear slide AND fine-adjusting the front sight, if required. All the non-refurb MN's I've had were filed on the slide and this are a was not blued (left in the white, though tarnished). Often the refurbs are filed, but re-blued, meaning not replaced at refurb. It also makes a big difference whether you use 180gn ammo (like hungarian heavy ball) or the 148gn ammo like Czech silver tip and most Russian loadings. The 148gn ammo was the WW2 issue type.