M91/30 PU sniper question

[Dutch Mosin]

I think you’re right Robert.

Although the PU glass is very well made (IMHO) I’ll keep looking for an “original” one.

Could take a long time and a lot of money, but I’m in no hurry.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Martin

[RGRWJB]

They may be being made on the same machinery, but not certainly the same way they did in WWII. During WWII they choose the most accurate test fired rifles and lined up the scope mount and rings with the axis of the bore. That way you don't have to zero the rifle and have the reticle up in one of the corners.

I am certainly not an "expert" on these, but I was once a military sniper.

[tuco]

"That way you don't have to zero the rifle and have the reticle up in one of the corners. "

Some real snipers need some work as well in grinding the mounts. I have been told this is much more work on these but that is not a shock.

The rifles they are using are picked at random. Some might be decent shooters but others might not be. For sure not the same standard as a real sniper. The scopes on the other hand are better than those made during the war. Better optics and better seals.

[Niner]

To me the largest problem wasn't the mount or getting it where the sight picture was centered and correct at the same time. The largest problem was that, from shooting vibration, the screws would loosen and the scope would have to be zeroed again. I am going to get some lock tight or crazy glue or something to keep the screws from loosening and causing the scope to get out of adjustment.

[tuco]

Some of the early ones made did not use heat treated screws which can cause some MAJOR issues.

[RGRWJB]

Some real snipers need some work as well in grinding the mounts. I have been told this is much more work on these but that is not a shock.

Researchers in Finland that have been to Russia found that when the Russians did make "REAL" snipers the arsenal aligned the mount/rings with the axis of the bore. I do not understand why there would need fitting if that’s the case Brent. Maybe the ones that are faked may need alignment fitting, but not one made by the Russians long ago. This is certainly not done with these new sniper rifles that they are assembling now, even if they did it on original machinery.

I think some are really let down when they find an original sniper gun converted to a standard 91/30,with the screw hole filled. Then they try to remount another scope and mount on it to make it "REAL" again. First of all the rifle was accurate at one time, but now with a new stock or bolt its not the same gun accuracy wise. Then of course the mount and scope was not centered on the axis of the bore.

One of the main high lights of the REAL Russian sniper rifle is that they used the most accurate rifles test fired, when putting them together. They don't do that now when they make this new one even if the optics may be better.

Niner

As far as the screws coming loose indicate the screws do not fit right. Another sign of bad eastern block work again.

[tuco]

I did not state they did not align these as I know they did. As for not having to grind the mounts - Info stating this was not done is dead wrong. Mounts often did need to either be ground as the final setting on these. This practice is known to have been done as the Russians as it is even spelled out in some of the Soviet sniper manuals and training practices. Also if you look at real snipers it is very common to see some grind marks on the mounts. In most cases this was done before issue but was also done along the way if a new scope needed to be added (as scopes break) or if there were other problem. Now with these repros one has to do a lot more work in regards to grinding but even a real sniper has had the same work done - just not to the same degree. Again this from the Russians who made the rifles and what they state about it. Recall the Soviets mass production was not to the same standard as the West and there are more fitting issues due to this. As you state " Another sign of bad eastern block work again." Same case in the USSR and even though a lot of care was given in making the snipers the standards still....far from perfect.

As for

"Researchers in Finland that have been to Russia found that when the Russians did make "REAL" snipers the arsenal aligned the mount/rings with the axis of the bore. "

Russians have said this for years so it is not somehow new information. I know of at least one researcher here in the US that mentioned this over 10 years ago with his contacts in the former USSR. The same person has also been to Russia a number of times doing research with the Russians help. There are also two Russian researchers - who are working on book - that have been digging in archives for about 7 years now. They have found some great info that should come out soon - at least I hope.

As I stated SOME of the real snipers will need this same work just in a lesser manner. This very much the case as most snipers seen today are reworks that in the form they are now did not see issue. They were reworked and stored as they had been retired as a standard rifle at that point. As such they were not as important as they were when these were being issued directly to Red Army soldiers. When I sorted a few hundred of these at import some of the mounts would not even fit the base and these were real snipers not repros. This was not the norm but in a few hundred there were a few that were off this much.

I do agree that these ex-snipers made into "real" snipers are still just ex-snipers. One can stick a scope - mount on them and bend the bolt but they are still a retired sniper. They to me are not restored but are just a mix of parts. Even worse than these are the ones that are a mix of parts - some real and some repro (this is more common with the PEM styles). These are called restored by many but to me if you use repro parts it is far from "real" and not restore either. It is what it is - The sum of its parts.

[RGRWJB]

When I sorted a few hundred of these at import some of the mounts would not even fit the base and these were real snipers not repros.

A few hundred huh. Thats a lot.

[tuco]

It was rather interesting to do. I am lucky in that over the years I have built a good relationship with some o f the importers – which has given me access to various imports. When Gary Cole brought these snipers in I was lucky enough to view crates of them in a few trips up to KY. Going to an importer is almost a surreal experience for a collector as the volume of rifles is almost overwhelming. I was at IO when they had 5,000 M39’s and at TN GUNS looking over almost 14,000!!!!! That was almost an overload to my system. It is funny as I bet that I have sorted and viewed somewhere between 7,000-10,000 K98 rifles and I do not even collect them. This at TN GUNS and IO INC. I have seen almost that many M9130’s, M38 and M44 carbines as well in the past few years as this influx from the Ukraine made the importers Mosin Nagant heaven…….. The bad thing about this is that after a while all the rifles start to look alike. Stunning stuff but also sort of sad when I can not bring them all home to add to my collection.

[RGRWJB]

Wow

Thats a lot. I'm impressed.