Which WW2 Surplus Rifle?
03-23-2014, 10:21 AM
#21
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
Originally Posted by Nomercy448
The OP's original post mentioned he was looking to buy a WWII surplus rifle for cheap because he was tight on money building an AR. I made the suggestion to not waste his money on $200 surplus rifles and put that money towards his AR.
And of course we've brought up more expensive surplus rifles, which also don't fit into this conversation, because that's not what he's asking about. For the price of swedes or other mausers, or US battle rifles or carbines, he could finish the AR he's building, so it defeats the point of buying a cheap surplus rifle while building it.
And of course we've brought up more expensive surplus rifles, which also don't fit into this conversation, because that's not what he's asking about. For the price of swedes or other mausers, or US battle rifles or carbines, he could finish the AR he's building, so it defeats the point of buying a cheap surplus rifle while building it.
Kind of unlike you to beat-up on NoMercy for merely making a "suggestion".
03-23-2014, 06:57 PM
#22
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,872
No worries on my end, just wanted to clarify to Flags how the AR's got roped into a WWII rifle conversation. Wasn't really brought in as part of the WWII conversation, but instead brought in because the OP mentioned BOTH. 
03-23-2014, 07:47 PM
#23
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: orygun
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Nomercy448
My thoughts on surplus rifles:
If it's just a toy and you're looking to waste a lil money, then get the Mosin (because you'll be able to find ammo for it easier than the others) and knock yourself out. Tons of guys buy them (been through a few myself), tons of guys realize they wasted their money on them. It's kinda like buying a 1992 F-150 with 250k miles on it, just because you can get it for $500, you don't really end up getting much out of it before you realize it seemed better at the time than it really is.
- A "couple hundred bucks" and the ammo cost to feed it will mean a few hundred, or more, bucks spent. Feeding another "mouth" in the house will mean a continual/sustained additional cost.
- AR builds have become less affordable in recent years, but even still, $200-400 you'll spend on a Mosin and ammo to feed it would go a long ways (build your complete lower for that).
- You get what you pay for when you go looking for a wife in a house of ill-repute.
If it's just a toy and you're looking to waste a lil money, then get the Mosin (because you'll be able to find ammo for it easier than the others) and knock yourself out. Tons of guys buy them (been through a few myself), tons of guys realize they wasted their money on them. It's kinda like buying a 1992 F-150 with 250k miles on it, just because you can get it for $500, you don't really end up getting much out of it before you realize it seemed better at the time than it really is.
03-23-2014, 07:49 PM
#24
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: orygun
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Nomercy448
Why?
The price of a Nissan Versa could quintuple in price and it wouldn't effect me in the least. The price of a Mosin Nagant could skyrocket to $1000 a piece and it wouldn't effect me either. I also don't need a pair of size 7 shoes, for any purpose, nor a cage for a dolphin, nor a hot air balloon.... See the connection??
Do you NEED a Nagant? No matter what the price might be, why SHOULD you buy one, ever? You're not missing out.
The price of a Nissan Versa could quintuple in price and it wouldn't effect me in the least. The price of a Mosin Nagant could skyrocket to $1000 a piece and it wouldn't effect me either. I also don't need a pair of size 7 shoes, for any purpose, nor a cage for a dolphin, nor a hot air balloon.... See the connection??
Do you NEED a Nagant? No matter what the price might be, why SHOULD you buy one, ever? You're not missing out.
03-23-2014, 07:52 PM
#25
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: orygun
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Nomercy448
To each their own, I don't agree that AR's are soul-less in the least, especially one that you built yourself. I'm not usually one to say any firearm has a soul,
I could just as easily make the connection that surplus rifles are like hookers, dirty and lacking class, some look good, some run good, but ya still don't take it home for supper...
Or maybe they're women past their prime? Nah, they don't look bad, bit too heavy, a little weird shaped, a few dents and dimples scattered around, a few things might not work as well as they used to, and they don't have the fun features some of the new models bring to the table...
I went through several surplus rifles over the years, have a couple Swede's that are indeed fantastic, rebuilt/sporterized a few mausers, had a spanish mauser with a springfield 2 groove barrel in 308win that was one of the straightest shooting sporting rifles I've ever owned.
But talking about proper mausers and mosins in the same breath because they're both "surplus rifles" is kinda like talking about an old Mazda pick up and a new Lincoln MKZ because both are "motor vehicles". Mausers and Mosins aren't in the same class by a long shot.
I could just as easily make the connection that surplus rifles are like hookers, dirty and lacking class, some look good, some run good, but ya still don't take it home for supper...
Or maybe they're women past their prime? Nah, they don't look bad, bit too heavy, a little weird shaped, a few dents and dimples scattered around, a few things might not work as well as they used to, and they don't have the fun features some of the new models bring to the table...
I went through several surplus rifles over the years, have a couple Swede's that are indeed fantastic, rebuilt/sporterized a few mausers, had a spanish mauser with a springfield 2 groove barrel in 308win that was one of the straightest shooting sporting rifles I've ever owned.
But talking about proper mausers and mosins in the same breath because they're both "surplus rifles" is kinda like talking about an old Mazda pick up and a new Lincoln MKZ because both are "motor vehicles". Mausers and Mosins aren't in the same class by a long shot.
Last edited by jdhogg; 03-23-2014 at 07:55 PM.
03-24-2014, 03:07 AM
#26
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,227
Originally Posted by Nomercy448
No worries on my end, just wanted to clarify to Flags how the AR's got roped into a WWII rifle conversation. Wasn't really brought in as part of the WWII conversation, but instead brought in because the OP mentioned BOTH.
I've used an AR type rifle for 25 years on active duty and while they are a great gun, they don't have the same "charm", at least to me, that a WWII era firearm has.
03-24-2014, 07:28 PM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,872
Originally Posted by Colorado Luckydog
You guys shouldn't argue with Mr. Know It All. Your going to make him prove he's right by posting a picture of his deer, AGAIN! LMFAO!!
Suppose I should get on the wife to upload new pics to share online more often so I have more than a few to pick from.In the interest of brevity, I could care less whether you wear boxers or briefs, but rather just making the point that some prefer one, others prefer the other. I've enjoyed both, but for what it's worth, a modern bolt action would get my nod long before I spent money on another Mosin. There's just nothing particularly great about them to pique my interest. It's just as easy for me to denigrate the Mosin's as it is for some others here to bad mouth AR's (or to start name calling, for that matter - which is well appreciated).
Mausers like the swedes are a different story, and I mentioned I've owned a few and enjoyed them. But then again, I paid a lot more than what Mosin's go for, which is the point of the OP's thread - a cheap surplus rifle. Not that the Mausers tend to go for super high numbers, but they ain't a $200 rifle on most shelves.
Mausers or AR's aside, I can't say that I think there's any redeeming quality to a Mosin Nagant, whether you can shoot one well to 500yrds or not - that's not a unique feature. I just don't see the point in it.
03-24-2014, 07:33 PM
#29
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,872
Originally Posted by flags
I know he mentioned both but the main thrust of the topic was WWII rifles. There were some great firearms from that period and I didn't want to see all those classics become ignored by the thread switching to the AR platform which happens far too often in this type of thread.
Can you can still find the swede's cheap?? I'd love to have another, but I keep seeing them at $400-600 lately, considering I paid $75 for the first swede I had, it's hard to swallow $400+ for one???
Last edited by Nomercy448; 03-24-2014 at 07:35 PM.
04-02-2014, 10:35 PM
#30
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: orygun
Posts: 379
nontypical
i need to appologize for my rant last week.i do like my old surplus rifles that are worth shooting.i bought a m1917 remington enfield,already sporterized for 75.00,just the barreled action.i got it home and cleaned it up and guess what?i gotta 300 h&h,it had been barreled and never finished.i had it checked out by 2 gunsmiths and they said shoot it so im gonna stock it and give it a try.not bad for 75.00
