JoeyM wrote: Aaargh! I've been reading/watching stuff on the cosmoline removal, and this does not look like fun.I did see one useful tip......large diameter PVC, capped on the end, as a container to soak the barrel in.
Saw that also. Looked like a good idea. Picked one of these up myself recently at a gun show. Looks like a mess to clean. Also picked up surplus corrosive ammo at the same show $5 for 20 rounds.
Well, I finally got out to the range and put some rounds through the mosin. (I left the bayonet at home.) The gun worked fine, but I definitely need to practice/learn. I was consistently high, and my groups were nothing to write home about (open hand sized @ ~50 yards) but I would still call it a successful test. Next time I may go on Friday so Dad can come and play, too.
Shooting high is a common issue, as the rear sight is calibrated for a relatively high minimum range (varies from model to model, IIRC). A taller front sight will bring your POA/POI closer together if you're going to be shooting at such short ranges.
Accuracy may or may not improve with practice. MNs are not inherently accurate beyond the minute-of-torso necessary for a military rifle. See if you can find something online about shimming the receiver; the Finnish rifles often have this done to good effect.
Remember that it's a relatively crudely made implement designed to be aimed at an enemy's belt buckle by an illiterate peasant and your expectations will probably be in line with the rifle's true capabilities.
02Pilot wrote: Shooting high is a common issue, as the rear sight is calibrated for a relatively high minimum range (varies from model to model, IIRC). A taller front sight will bring your POA/POI closer together if you're going to be shooting at such short ranges.
That does appear to be the case
http://www.smith-sights.com/
No more aiming low. Drift adjustable for windage and adjustable for elevation, these sights solve your high shooting problems!
the vendor would not make these claims if being high was not common
02Pilot wrote: Accuracy may or may not improve with practice. MNs are not inherently accurate beyond the minute-of-torso necessary for a military rifle.
I don't need sub-MOA....but I may want to hunt a pig every now and then.
JoeyM wrote: I don't need sub-MOA....but I may want to hunt a pig every now and then.
Let me see if I have any photos of my shimming setup squirreled away. I've done it on every MN I own, usually with decent results, though final accuracy depends on a lot more than bedding. The triggers and cocking ramps also benefit from some polishing, if you're so inclined. Experiment with different loads and heavy/light bullets; some prefer light ~150grn bullets, some prefer heavier ~200grn bullets. There's also some inconsistency in actual barrel diameters, anywhere from .308 to around .312 in unworn barrels.
I found this at
http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinFAQ.htm
their FAQ said: Q. Where can I find a taller front sight? A. It depends on the model. I'm not aware of a source for taller early blade type sights. The post on some of the later globe type sights can be replaced from the bottom, after removing them from the barrel, with a finishing nail and then filed to length. Otherwise a quick non-permanent fix is to slip a small piece of tubing (wire insulation, coffee stir stick, roll pin, etc.) over the post and trim it to length.
I just tried the coffee stirrer trick (Thanks, 7-11) but will not know if it helps until I get out to the range again. I like the fact that their stirrer is red. (McDonalds has black ones, and Wendy's has White ones, if either one of those colors is what you'd prefer.)
For comparison, the vendor linked above sells this sight for $42 dollars (plus shipping.)
I'm sure it works better than the coffee stirrer, but I doubt the difference is so dramatic that it is worth 1/3 the price of the gun.
The only thing I don't like about using a sleeve to raise the front sight post is that it also widens the front sight post. The notch in the rear sight is tiny, and the front sight post will now be hard to center (if it wasn't already) unless you enlarge the rear notch. It might work for you, it might not.
Correct. The beauty of the method, though, is that it is temporary, easily reversible, and cost2 nothing. I'll let you know later how well it did (or didn't) work
Well, I tried the coffee stirrer mod out today, and I think it improved the gun a bit at short ranges. At long ranges, yes, the width of the stirrer is an issue.
Now the sad bit. I thought that I was at the 100 yard section of the range before, and I was at the 50. That means that my prior group of "open hand sized @ ~50 yards" was actually shot at somewhere in the 30 yard range (just a bit past half way.)
Today I was at the same part of the range (i.e. 50 yard max) and shot at two distances, 50 yards and approx 20 yards.
At 50 yards, the post/coffee stirrer of the front site was as wide as the target appeared. @ 20 yards, I was actually able to aim a little. This was bench rest, but just the "lay it across a wood block", no facy bipods or sand bags.
I've still got a lot of practicing to do, but I felt better about it today. Oh, the wood still sweated a little cosmoline when the gun heated up a bit.
I also shot another guy's hi point 9mm rifle after he shot my mosin. I have scope envy.
If you pull the sight apart, you can press out the post and make a new one. Try shooting one with stock sights at 100 yards, THATS a challenge.
Kenny_McCormic wrote: If you pull the sight apart, you can press out the post and make a new one. Try shooting one with stock sights at 100 yards, THATS a challenge.
It was already challenging...I could not see any bullet holes while shooting....Dad was using the binoculars to spot for me. I wonder if there's way to use a thinner post. I'll admit that I like the narrow top on this post.
You'll need to log in to post.
