learn me rifle and sights

The pre-scoped rifles aren't a bad start for a basic rifle, and the price is right. Getting the right combination of bases and rings can be confusing, and the factories usually come pretty close to getting things screwed together properly. Don't expect a premium scope, but the basic one should work well enough. If it doesn't, it can easily be replaced when you're ready.

I'm not a fan of the typical no-gunsmithing scope mounts I've seen, including the "scout" style for Mosins and Mausers. Those I've used tended to shoot loose quickly. A certain cartoon rodent comes to mind.

I love good iron sights - adjustable aperture rear sight and a protected narrow post up front - but a scope of the right magnification does give a better view in a lot of situations.

<== doesn't drink

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:

JoeyM wrote: DTs?

Delirium Tremen ( "the shakes") is mainly caused after a long period of drinking, being stopped abruptly and experiencing withdrawal,

yamaha wrote: Steer clear of Bushnell, bariska, and BSA......my friend and I ran into issue with all three not holding zero from just recoil. I bought my 700 barely used with a really nice tasco world class sitting on top for $375.

Like this 3-9x40mm? Am I correct that the 3-9x50 mm would be better for dusk? (bigger opening to collect light)

JoeyM wrote: Maybe it is just the iron sights of the Mosin, but my front post hides the target even at 50 yards. I'd like to see the target when I shoot, and preferably have enough magnification to be able to see where the bullets are hitting it.

Sounds to me like you're not setting the rear elevation correctly then.

I'm personally not against a scope, it's a tool/toy, and none of us ever have enough tools or toys.

I'll caution against mega magnification. For with that all you see are hairs on a deer, or fibers in the paper. You can't see your target, and everything is jumping something fierce.

Scopes do help for hunting, by gathering in light in those early/late dusky conditions. I've let many a deer walk by because while I could see it, I couldn't see my dark iron gun sights well enough to take the shot. With a good scope, I could have.

Let's not forget that the purpose of a scope is not to make a gun more accurate (it doesn't), but to help the shooter see the target.

Give me a tack-driver rifle with iron sights, and I can't do much better than 2-3 moa because I just can't see the target precisely enough to do any better.

foxtrapper wrote:

JoeyM wrote: Maybe it is just the iron sights of the Mosin, but my front post hides the target even at 50 yards. I'd like to see the target when I shoot, and preferably have enough magnification to be able to see where the bullets are hitting it.

Sounds to me like you're not setting the rear elevation correctly then.

Bear in mind that many Mosin-Nagant variants have a minimum rear sight setting of 400m, and often extend out to 2000m.

For hog hunting I'd think a red dot would be preferable.

02Pilot wrote: Bear in mind that many Mosin-Nagant variants have a minimum rear sight setting of 400m, and often extend out to 2000m.

Not really true. The metric variants start marks at 2. The Russian arshini ones start marks at 4. But all had detents to lower the rear site ahead of those first numbers.

Which is all moot considering the slop of the rear sites. Always seemed like you could get five degrees either side. Especially with thr Russian sights.

http://russian-mosin-nagant-forum.com/information/faq/index.html#Q10

stroker wrote: For hog hunting I'd think a red dot would be preferable.

Possibly, but that's the secondary use....the primary is paper perforation, and I definitely want a little magnification for that.

If you insist on a scope, be sure to learn to look through it correctly. Says a guy with a small curved scar between his eyes from a Weaver wide angle scope mounted on a .444 Marlin. Couldn't get a good sight picture through the scope, when I did finally get a good sight and squeezed the trigger I bounced the scope between my eyes and ended up with a couple stitches.

The rest of the story... the .444 Marlin belonged to a friend and he was sighting in the scope and letting me trial shoot a .22 rifle he did some work on (he's a gunsmith) and wanted to trade me. When he had it sighted in he let me shoot a round through it. I should also mention that at the time I wasn't very experienced with scopes. Been shooting all my life but always open sights or military sights. When I walked into the house with a bandage between my eyes carrying the .22 rifle, my wife asked what happened. Told her about the scope bouncing off my head, her next remark was "and you still bought it?" Then had to explain calibers to her.

Also, the majority of Leupolds we have are 3x-9X power. Never needed to go above the 4X, and we zero the rifle at 300yds. We have a lot of 50mm lenses. It makes for a nice field of view, but, again, they are spendy. 30mm-40mm will be more than fine to start with, IMO.

wlkelley3 wrote: If you insist on a scope, be sure to learn to look through it correctly. Says a guy with a small curved scar between his eyes from a Weaver wide angle scope mounted on a .444 Marlin.

In the course of this thread, I've moved a little more strongly towards the idea of scout scoping the mosin, using a pistol scope (because of the long eye relief). The scout mount may (as Dr. Hess pointed out) be ugly, but it will allow me to get by without having to buy a bent bolt. Your story about getting smacked in the face gives me one more reason to think along these lines..

I found something at midway that looks OK and has decent reviews, but it is a BSA (i.e. one of the three brands that yamaha has had problems with.). One of the things I like is that a few of the reviews (3 of 8) it are from people who mounted it on a mosin as a scout scope and had favorable results.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/821444/bsa-edge-pistol-scope-2-7x-32mm-duplex-reticle-matte
There's a similar Simmons at Sportsman's Guide and Nachez

Should stay away from either of these? (I'm already putting yamaha down in the yes column.)

As far as the mount goes, the best one I ever found seems to be out of stock at the moment, with no indication of when it might be back (one man operation AFAIK). See here: Scout mounts

02Pilot wrote: As far as the mount goes, the best one I ever found seems to be out of stock at the moment, with no indication of when it might be back (one man operation AFAIK). See here: Scout mounts

There's a list of several mounting options here. I've heard good things about the Darryl's mount you linked to. How did yours hold up?

I was leaning towards either mounting it directly to the dovetail under the rear sight using .22 rings or using the JMeck's mount that uses a band around the receiver. (which should have less chance of moving forward due to recoil.) JMeck's says you can turn the weaver rail around to scout mount.)

My friend who just got a Mosin is thinking about the brass stacker mount.

JoeyM wrote:

wlkelley3 wrote: If you insist on a scope, be sure to learn to look through it correctly. Says a guy with a small curved scar between his eyes from a Weaver wide angle scope mounted on a .444 Marlin.

In the course of this thread, I've moved a little more strongly towards the idea of scout scoping the mosin, using a pistol scope (because of the long eye relief). The scout mount may (as Dr. Hess pointed out) be ugly, but it will allow me to get by without having to buy a bent bolt. Your story about getting smacked in the face gives me one more reason to think along these lines.. I found something at midway that looks OK and has decent reviews, but it is a BSA (i.e. one of the three brands that yamaha has had problems with.). One of the things I like is that a few of the reviews (3 of 8) it are from people who mounted it on a mosin as a scout scope and had favorable results. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/821444/bsa-edge-pistol-scope-2-7x-32mm-duplex-reticle-matte There's a similar Simmons at Sportsman's Guide and Nachez Should stay away from either of these? (I'm already putting yamaha down in the yes column.)

I'm almost certain we used to carry a Scout mount for the Mosin made by B-Square but I think it's been discontinued. What about this?

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/705908/advanced-technology-weaver-style-scope-mounting-system-with-bent-bolt-handle-mosin-nagant

I'd be very leery of a BSA pistol scope tolerating the recoil of a bolt-action 7.62x54 for very long. Leupold and Burris both offer Scout-style scopes. I bought a factory blem Leupold a few years ago cheap intending to put it on my SOCOM-16 but have never used it.

stroker wrote:

JoeyM wrote: In the course of this thread, I've moved a little more strongly towards the idea of scout scoping the mosin, I found something at midway that looks OK and has decent reviews, but it is a BSA

I'm almost certain we used to carry a Scout mount for the Mosin made by B-Square but I think it's been discontinued. What about this? http://www.midwayusa.com/product/705908/advanced-technology-weaver-style-scope-mounting-system-with-bent-bolt-handle-mosin-nagant

Can that rail be used in scout mount? really want the scope far enough forward that it won't mess with the bolt?

stroker wrote: I'd be very leery of a BSA pistol scope tolerating the recoil of a bolt-action 7.62x54 for very long. Leupold and Burris both offer Scout-style scopes.

They're certainly better built, but $250 to $300 is a lot for 2x magnification....especially if it is narrow and not collecting much light.

AAARRRGGHH!!! This is not fun.

Something like a Savage Hog Hunter will feel awesome compared to a Mosin. Take the extra money you'd "waste" on the Mosin, and buy a Savage. I wouldn't get an Axis.

If you're having trouble hitting your target at 50 yards with iron sights, you should probably get your eyes checked. My range qualification scores started to go down to the point where I was barely passing. I ended up getting glasses when I failed a DMV eye test. It made a world of difference.

rotard wrote: If you're having trouble hitting your target at 50 yards with iron sights, you should probably get your eyes checked.

I can hit the target the vast majority of the time, but 50 yards should be point blank range for a gun like that.....I ought to be able to keep them near the bull's eye.

I may be due for an eye exam (it has been a couple of years since I got new glasses) but I think part of the issue is that the target @50 yds is mostly covered up by the iron sights (the stock mosin sight pretty thick, and my plastic coffee stirrer extension doesn't help

I can still see the outer edges of the target, but I cannot see where the bullets are hitting it. Should I be able to see an approx. 8mm hole @ 50 yards? That's what I'd like; i.e. the ability to see where I'm hitting so I know how to correct.

A scope isn't going to fix that!

google "proper sight picture" and just read.

This is an alright START

http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m16a2/four-fundamentals-of-mark.shtml

Then.. That russian is kicking you like a mule.. and I promise. You are flinching like crazy. Your trigger control suffers because you are anticipating the bang.

Get some dummy rounds... Then 'surprise' yourself with rounds that don't fire (don't get stupid though treat it like a hang fire always keeping the weapon pointed downrange) and when these round don't fire have a friend there to laugh at you (or just take video) as you move the barrel all around in anticipation of the bang.

You eyes are a bad excuse unless they are doing something different each time you look downrange and take aim... and I seriously doubt that.

You shouldn't be worried about how to correct anything until you can shoot nice clean tight groups.

My Darrell's mount has held up fine. The Brass Stacker you linked to looks similar in concept, though Darrell's appears better finished and looks less fussy.

That band clamp mount may not move fore and aft, but I'd be concerned about it moving side to side. Not an ideal solution to my mind. The direct-to-dovetail idea is clever and probably the most elegant (if that word can be applied to anything associated with a Mosin-Nagant) solution, but if that rear sight is soldered down it's not going to be so easy.

As to the accuracy question, I said it before and I'll say it again: check that the rifle can be made accurate (bore and crown condition, secured benchrest testing) before putting time and effort into mounting a scope.

Joey, with scopes, the larger objective does let more light in, but if you are going 50mm objective, you'll want a 30mm tube. Mine is a 40mm 1" tube combo that does work well. also remember to keep the scope as low to the rifle without touching anywhere but the mounts.

For hog hunting, a good red dot would probably serve you well. I am still on the fence at buying a 2x night vision optic eventually for coyotes. Right now I'll just leave bait under a duck to dawn light down range and pick them off at 2-300.

yamaha wrote: Joey, with scopes, the larger objective does let more light in, but if you are going 50mm objective, you'll want a 30mm tube.

Don't forget that the whole concept of a "Scout" scope was to keep the scope as low as possible to still retain the use of the open sights if necessary. If you get a scope with an enormous lens/tube combination you'll have to mount the thing so high you'll need to change your head position relative to the stock to see through it. That's completely contrary to the original idea of being able to flip back and forth between the optics and the open sights as necessary. A "Scout" rifle is supposed to be optimized for shots no further than 200 yards. That's why you shouldn't need big optics on it.

Per above I don't think your accuracy problems are based on lack of optics. You should be able to put 10 out of 10 into a 9" paper plate at 100 yards with the open sights on your rifle off a bench or prone. Even with my old eyeballs I can do that with mine.

ronholm wrote: A scope isn't going to fix that! google "proper sight picture" and just read. This is an alright START http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m16a2/four-fundamentals-of-mark.shtml

I appreciate the link, and will definitely study it. videotaping is also a good idea. I didn't know that dummy rounds existed. I'll need to look into that.

What I'm not clear on is whether or not I should be able to see bullet holes at 50 yards with the naked eye. I definitely cannot (I can't even see individual holes them at 20 yards.) Is that normal, or is that a "go get your eyes checked" situation?

I would like to have the instantaneous feedback of knowing right away that I'm shooting high or low. Looking at a target several minutes after the fact is like reviewing the autocross run later on via in car video. Not bad, but not the same as having an instructor in the car with you telling you immediately when you're messing up.

I would not expect to be able to see holes in paper at 50 yards, at least not reliably, without magnification; certainly not at 100 or more. I do not recommend the ability to see your POI as a criteria for a rifle scope, though depending on the magnification it can help, but it still won't be enough to pick out finer details. Either work with a spotter or get a spotting scope you can check your work with.

The Mosin is a battle rifle. It is combat accurate, but is no sniper rifle. Hitting bullseyes at 100 yards probably won't happen. Judging from your 20 yard target, you need to focus on the fundamentals and properly zero your sights. A scope won't help your groupings. If you get the fundamentals down, your groups will improve dramatically.