Mosin Nagant Rear Sight Removal
I already did a search and have not found a solution so I am giving out a shout here.
I have a 1935 Tula 91/30 hex reciever. I decided to mount a scout scope. I decided I would remove the rear sigt completley to get to the 3/8 dovetail underneath to have a very solid mount for my scope, and to leave the rifle in a condition where I will not have permanently altered the rifle and can put it back in the factory condition (other than the fact that I refinished the stock).
So, I disassembled the action & barrel from the stock, and went to work. First I removed the set screw on the top of the sight, then I tapped out the pin that holds the actual leaf to the rear sight device, then removed that silver colored spring.
the two main pins that hold the sight apparatus to the dovetail would not budge, so I decided to use a little bit of heat from a propane torch, still not budging.
I was wondering if there are any other tricks that I should know about or if anyone else has had this problem and how I can fix it.
I have a 1935 Tula 91/30 hex reciever. I decided to mount a scout scope. I decided I would remove the rear sigt completley to get to the 3/8 dovetail underneath to have a very solid mount for my scope, and to leave the rifle in a condition where I will not have permanently altered the rifle and can put it back in the factory condition (other than the fact that I refinished the stock).
So, I disassembled the action & barrel from the stock, and went to work. First I removed the set screw on the top of the sight, then I tapped out the pin that holds the actual leaf to the rear sight device, then removed that silver colored spring.
the two main pins that hold the sight apparatus to the dovetail would not budge, so I decided to use a little bit of heat from a propane torch, still not budging.
I was wondering if there are any other tricks that I should know about or if anyone else has had this problem and how I can fix it.
0
-
Its been a while since I've done it, but if I remember right, the ONLY thing that holds the rear sight in place on its base is the hinge pin you've drifted out.
Once that's out, you should be able to remove both the silver-colored leaf spring and the rear sight assembly pretty easily.
Scroll down here for some pictures of what I am talking about:
http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinDisassembly.htm
Now, if you want to remove the actual sight BASE from the barrel, that's a different issue.
Those are held in place with two really tight pins, and the base itself is often silver-soldered in place onto the barrel. So getting that off may require some pretty serious whacking with a hammer and hardened punch to drift the pins, as well as melting off the silver solder from the base.
I'd suggest to you that if all you want to do is put a scout scope in place, its really not necessary to remove the sight base. In fact, its probably counterproductive. As you've noted, the base is already mounted dead rock solid to the barrel with pins and solder.
In practice, you're not going to get a more stable scope platform by knocking off the sight base and mounting directly the barrel, as you would by mounting to the base.
Trying to remove the base is just more work for you, and more chance to damage something along the way. I'd suggest just attaching your scope mount to the rear sight base with any one of several available mounts, and you'll be good to go.
Here's my Mosin M44 with an SK type scout scope mount mounted directly into the rear sight mount. Its rock solid and easy to install, though at around $75, not cheap. There are cheaper options out there, but that's the subject of another post.0 -
Thanks very much for the info, your M44 looks sweet! I would love to get an M44 as well as it makes (in my opinion) the closest rifle to Jeff Cooper's idea of a scout rifle for the least amount of money.
My goal with my 91/30 however, is to take a rifle with a significant amount of history (not neccesarily $ value, but thats a different story). Mount a scope to it that does not permanently so its historical value is not lowered, and have it be able to hold zero and shoot under 4 MOA, all for less than it takes just to buy a "good hunting rifle". Then I can prove to all the naysayers that you cant have a scoped, reliable, accurate deer rifle for less than 250 bucks. Of course the only way to really stick it to them is to take at least one deer with the thing eventually, but until I am extremley satisfied with the setup and chances of a clean humane kill (i.e. the scope keeps a good zero with some repeated recoil), then I will stick to paper.
While the S&K does cost as much as a mosin nagant (depending on the type), I think im going to buy one....I have read nothing buy good reviews now that you have showed them to me, and the fact that its made in the USA and all steel I think will still keep that old military feel to it (somewhat), as well as give bussiness to what appears to be a smaller American company.
Thanks for the suggestion, and when all is ready and I get a chance, a range report will follow on the General Disscussion side (hopefully with some pics![:p]0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-y8lNlnLMM
here is a video to watch on removal.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
Thanks very much for the info, your M44 looks sweet! I would love to get an M44 as well as it makes (in my opinion) the closest rifle to Jeff Cooper's idea of a scout rifle for the least amount of money.
Thank you.
I built this one to do exactly what you describe. Specifically to create a cheap short rugged deer rifle that can take dirt-cheap surplus ammo (for lots of practice) and powerful enough that I could use it on anything. Its arguable how much collectors value these re-finished guns put out by the millions actually have, but everything I did to the gun would be easily reversible should I care to do that.
I agree with you 100% that this is probably the easiest way to create a Cooper-like "scout" rifle, though that said, like many I do partly question the validity of his "scout" concept.
If you're talking about something in a military context, the ability to load from stripper clips is certainly nice, but the ability to take detachable high-cap mags is probably better for real fighting (and I note the two are not actually mutually exclusive).
Likewise, the two eye open advantage of the "scout" scope is probably outweighed by the disadvantages of limited magnification and field of view. Scout setup is really nice for short range shooting, but its tough to place long shots precisely with this sort of setup.
Anyway, here's my experience with the above setup:
Rubber recoil pad is a necessity, both to reduce the brutal recoil of the 7.62x54R and also to increase length of pull. Mosin Nagant stock was designed to be fired by 5'5" Russian peasants wearing thick winter coats. 5'10" Americans in T-shirts are likely to find the stock 1-2" too short.
Bluntly, accuracy of this setup has been unimpressive. I'm getting roughly 4" 100 yard groups, though I have to say at least part of that is because the stock trigger on this one is just absolutely lousy, maybe 9 lbs and gritty. I bet a simple trigger job could cut group sizes by at least an inch. I also bet that I could shave off at least another inch off group size by free-floating the barrel and using good reloads, though I haven't bothered doing any of these things yet.
Still, since I basically consider this a 150 yard gun with the 2x scope, 4 inches is actually good enough.
Edit, responding to below:
quote:Dang my man, give yourself more credit than that. 4MOA is more than accurate enough for any man size target out to 400 yards, assuming you aim and pull on dead center of mass, you would hit in a vital area that would be in instant combat disqualifier and more than likely result in a kill in a minute, the closer they get, the bigger your target.....but then again, you are a true American so if its not capable of sub MOA its not real accuracy right?
Well, to be clear, when I said I consider this a 150 yard gun, I mean I only really intend to shoot it out to about that far. Certainly the round itself is capable way past that distance, I just don't intend to shoot further that with this gun.
On accuracy, its relative, but obviously more never hurts. No, I wouldn't call 4 MOA gun "accurate", though again, its good enough for my particular purpose. If I want something more accurate, I can get that. In this case, I wanted something rugged and relatively inexpensive.
Sure its "possible" to connect with a man sized target at 400 yards with a 2x scope, a 9-10 lb trigger and 4MOA accuracy. . .but the way I look at it, there are really much better setups for that. Doing it with this setup is just pushing things.
Assuming your 4MOA gun is locked in a machine rest (ie you take ALL human wobble and aiming out of the picture) a 4 MOA gun is still going to put up a 16" pattern at 400 yards. Yes, an adult human torso is more than 16" wide. . .assuming its fully exposed. . . but that really doesn't give you a lot of "wobble" room for error.
Certainly Mosin rifles were historically used as sniper rifles, and if you wanted to, you could do a Mosin sniper setup with bent down bolt, proper rear mounted scope, trigger job, free floated barrel, etc, but I think once you added all that, it probably would have been just as cost effective to start with a stock modern rifle as a base gun.
quote:Of course mine being a 91/30 its a little long for the scout concept, but none the less I think it will work great for a rifle out in the area where I live (I now live in an area where the forests def. provide room for a long rifle).
One thing about the 91/30, its quite a bit QUIETER than the M44 when shooting (plus less flash). Just because Cooper specified a short rifle for his "scout" doesn't mean you have to have one.
quote:Does the M44 and the 91/30 use the same rear sight? I noticed they have different codes on the M&K site, however I thought they had the same rear sight setup? I ask because I also intend to get an M44 soon enough and would like to see how compatiable they are with these mounts.
No. The design is similar, but the M44/M38 sight is shorter and only graduated to 1000M compared to the 2000M for the 91/30.
So there you go. . .the Soviets thought you should be able to shoot 2 km with your 91/30 with iron sights! [:p]0 -
quote:Originally posted by beantownshootah
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
Thanks very much for the info, your M44 looks sweet! I would love to get an M44 as well as it makes (in my opinion) the closest rifle to Jeff Cooper's idea of a scout rifle for the least amount of money.
Thank you.
I built this one to do exactly what you describe. Specifically to create a cheap short rugged deer rifle that can take dirt-cheap surplus ammo (for lots of practice) and powerful enough that I could use it on anything. Its arguable how much collectors value these re-finished guns put out by the millions actually have, but everything I did to the gun would be easily reversible should I care to do that.
I agree with you 100% that this is probably the easiest way to create a Cooper-like "scout" rifle, though that said, like many I do partly question the validity of his "scout" concept.
If you're talking about something in a military context, the ability to load from stripper clips is certainly nice, but the ability to take detachable high-cap mags is probably better for real fighting (and I note the two are not actually mutually exclusive).
Likewise, the two eye open advantage of the "scout" scope is probably outweighed by the disadvantages of limited magnification and field of view. Scout setup is really nice for short range shooting, but its tough to place long shots precisely with this sort of setup.
Anyway, here's my experience with the above setup:
Rubber recoil pad is a necessity, both to reduce the brutal recoil of the 7.62x54R and also to increase length of pull. Mosin Nagant stock was designed to be fired by 5'5" Russian peasants wearing thick winter coats. 5'10" Americans in T-shirts are likely to find the stock 1-2" too short.
Bluntly, accuracy of this setup has been unimpressive. I'm getting roughly 4" 100 yard groups, though I have to say at least part of that is because the stock trigger on this one is just absolutely lousy, maybe 9 lbs and gritty. I bet a simple trigger job could cut group sizes by at least an inch. I also bet that I could shave off at least another inch off group size by free-floating the barrel and using good reloads, though I haven't bothered doing any of these things yet.
Still, since I basically consider this a 150 yard gun with the 2x scope, 4 inches is actually good enough.
Dang my man, give yourself more credit than that. 4MOA is more than accurate enough for any man size target out to 400 yards, assuming you aim and pull on dead center of mass, you would hit in a vital area that would be in instant combat disqualifier and more than likely result in a kill in a minute, the closer they get, the bigger your target.[}:)]....but then again, you are a true American so if its not capable of sub MOA its not real accuracy right?[;)][:p]
Of course mine being a 91/30 its a little long for the scout concept, but none the less I think it will work great for a rifle out in the area where I live (I now live in an area where the forests def. provide room for a long rifle).
Does the M44 and the 91/30 use the same rear sight? I noticed they have different codes on the M&K site, however I thought they had the same rear sight setup? I ask because I also intend to get an M44 soon enough and would like to see how compatiable they are with these mounts. Thanks again for your info! I ended up going with a 4x fixed scope that has 1/4 MOA adjustments, the 4x being about the highest magnification I wanted to go with, but the price was right![:)]0 -
Take a looke here- http://www.surplusrifle.com/russianmosin189130/index.asp
I would call your attention to the articles on the right sidebar- scoping, scout scoping, and improving trigger pull.0 -
the link does not seem to work. 0 -
Kid- the server over at Surplusrifle.com crashed 2 days ago. They are trying to get it fixed. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments