Re: Mosin Nagant
Hello,
The 91/30 was meant to be accurized a bit from the factory. This included shimming, and the Finns finally did it.
However, the Russians decided minute-of-Nazi was good enough.
The sights were even regulated to reflect this: They hit high at 100 meters, by about 8". Good for peasant conscripts who were told to aim at the belt buckle. This ensured a lethal hit with a .30-06 class caliber out to about 300 yards. (Measuring my rifle's elevation, I'd would have come back to PBR at about 350 yards).
NOW, that's half the battle: Good sights. I have good sights; I make 'em. My sight posts are .060" vs the stock .080", and they cover about 2" at 100 yards.
I regularly shoot 2" and under at 100 yards, and I am not good with iron sights. I've broken MOA a few times with handloads.
These rifles are much more accurate than people generally credit them, but not accurate in the sense that precision 'scoped rifle are accurate.
I am not yet shooting to my Mosin's capability. Optics help me shoot to my precision rifles' capabilities, but it's still a matter of your skills.
If I had to hit something hard out to 300 yards in battlefield or bad hunting conditions, I'd choose the Mosin-Nagant. It's suitably accurate for that range, can hold that accuracy out further than I can reliably see, and will pretty much flatten anything on the North American continent.
On the other hand, if I have to take a precision shot at a squirrel's eyeball through early-season canopy, I will choose a precision rifle with a 'scope every time.
PM inbound.
Regards,
Josh