Battling with milsurps currently available

[SKS Ray]

This could be considered a topic for the survival forum but it deals with military surplus rifles so I'm posting it here. I know a lot of you have C&R licenses and receive monthly flyers from places that sell C&R eligible guns. Even if you don't, Shotgun News is full of adds and most places have the same basic stock of whats currently available for milsurp rifles. Enfields, Mosins, K98s, K31s, M95s, SKS's, etc. so you've all probably seen or had a chance to own most if not all of these.
My question is if you had to choose a milsurp rifle to defend yourself in a modern day SHTF situation, which would you choose?
Heres the catch... It has to be one of the more popular rifles listed these days on the milsurp market. Your choices are:

1) a Russian capture K98
2) a Russian 91/30 Mosin Nagant
3) a No4 Mk1 Enfield
4) a Swiss K31

These are the most readily available rifles these days on the surplus market. Don't choose by ammo availability. Think of it as unlimitted ammo at your side or as much as you can carry. Each has a sling, bayonet, and cleaning rod w/accessories. I know some of you want a Springfield to choose but CMP is sold out and they aren't readily available so you can't have one.
This is even a tough one for me to choose because I have at least one of each and enjoy them all. My choice though would be a Russian capture K98. The K98 rifle is accurate, hard hitting, long enough for long range shooting and short enough for tight spots. The bayonet is a standard blade style. Ammo doesn't have to be loaded in a particular way like a rimmed cartridge does and the bolt is smooth. The only drawbacks are the rear sling mount puts the strap against your face making a cheek weld a little uncomfortable, and the safety is exposed in a way that it coud be damaged and possible broke if the rifle is dropped. Other than that I'd say its the ideal battle rifle out of the selection offered these days.

 

[dwarven1]

Well, I don't have much experience with anything other than my M1, so a Garand would be my choice - it's the only milsurp in my gun cabinet so far!

 

[jhrosier]

I'd pick the No.4 Mk1 Enfield for speed of operation and good long range sights.

 

[sheriff dudley]

Battling with millsurps red-avail,

I'd pick the No.4 Mk1 Enfield for speed of operation and good long range sights.

Out of what you gave us to pick from, i do have to go along with what
JH said, but a close second would be the K-31!! i do believe that the K-31
will out-shoot the 303 Brit at any distance,But it is hard on the palm of
the hand after only a short time doing "rapid-fire" and i think thay all hit
equaly as hard!! (Just my two pennies)

Sheriff Dudley

 

[jhrosier]

Out of what you gave us to pick from, i do have to go along with what
JH said, but a close second would be the K-31!! i do believe that the K-31
will out-shoot the 303 Brit at any distance,But it is hard on the palm of
the hand after only a short time doing "rapid-fire" and i think thay all hit
equaly as hard!! (Just my two pennies)

Sheriff Dudley

SD,
The K31 is also one of my favorite rifles, HOWEVER...
The lack of camming force to seat or extract a dirty, corroded or dented round knocks it out of the running.
Jack

 

[AMV]

1st, Enfield
2nd K98

 

[Weerd Beard]

I'm saving my Pennies for a Yugo SKS, and it WILL be my SHTF gun.

from your list, I'd go with the 91/30....though I like the more compact, and integral Bayo of the M44.

I say this only because I've shot the M44 more than any other Milsurplus. Of course I'm REALLY falling in love with the Enfeild action, so that might become #1 on your chosen list pretty soon

Arrrr

-Weer'd Beard

PS: Fun topic!

 

[M1911]

I'd pick the No.4 Mk1 Enfield for speed of operation and good long range sights.

+1

I've got a No. 4. Accuracy is reasonable, the bolt speed is great, and I love the peep sights.

I've got a M44. It's a beast. The open sights are too hard to use with my old eyes, the muzzle blast is, to be polite, brisk, and the safety is unusable.

 

[stoneypete]

Of the options listed, my only experience is with my K98. Therefore that is my choice. (My REAL choice is the M1, but you did not give that as an option.)

 

[jhrosier]

Might be interesting to set up a test with the four rifles and four shooters. Each could fire ten shots through each rifle, timed fire and combine the scores for each rifle.

 

[USMA-82]

My take:

K31 - beautiful, scary-accurate rifle - but unproven in battle. A little worried about the straight-pull bolt mechanism in dirty environments - it didnt' work so hot for the Canadian Ross.

91/30 - Nice shooter with a hard-hitting round, but I keep feeling like I need training wheels to tote it around - damn, that thing is long! Definitely a war-proven rifle, though.

K98 - Haven't shot my RC yet, but I am impressed with how solid the thing is. Even the K98 bayonet feels like it was built by Mercedes. It may end up being my pick, depending on how things go on the range.

No.4, Mk1 - Well, clip-loading issues aside, I can't think of any negatives. It's battle proven, has a micrometer/aperture rear site for accurate shooting, is light and short enough to be handy, shoots a reasonably hard-hitting round, and (unlike all the others) has a 10-round capacity magazine. That, plus the fact I only paid $119 for the thing, makes me think I'd have no concern about dragging it through a TEOTWAWKI scenario.

Yup, right now I'd go with the Enfield, given the limited choices.

What's on my actual list for disaster scenarios? My Romanian SAR-1 with Kobra sight and tactical flashlight and a whole bunch of ammo (close work) and my FAL with 20x scope (distance work).

 

[sheriff dudley]

Battling W/Millies

+1

I've got a No. 4. Accuracy is reasonable, the bolt speed is great, and I love the peep sights.

I've got a M44. It's a beast. The open sights are too hard to use with my old eyes, the muzzle blast is, to be polite, brisk, and the safety is unusable.

I do go along with M1911 as far as the M44 being a beast, i just got rid of
a M38 (same thing,no bayo) because of my old eyes and the outher reason
was " i quit shooting guns that KILL on both ends a long time ago"

Sheriff Dudley

 

[SKS Ray]

My take:

K31 - beautiful, scary-accurate rifle - but unproven in battle. A little worried about the straight-pull bolt mechanism in dirty environments - it didnt' work so hot for the Canadian Ross.

91/30 - Nice shooter with a hard-hitting round, but I keep feeling like I need training wheels to tote it around - damn, that thing is long! Definitely a war-proven rifle, though.

K98 - Haven't shot my RC yet, but I am impressed with how solid the thing is. Even the K98 bayonet feels like it was built by Mercedes. It may end up being my pick, depending on how things go on the range.

No.4, Mk1 - Well, clip-loading issues aside, I can't think of any negatives. It's battle proven, has a micrometer/aperture rear site for accurate shooting, is light and short enough to be handy, shoots a reasonably hard-hitting round, and (unlike all the others) has a 10-round capacity magazine. That, plus the fact I only paid $119 for the thing, makes me think I'd have no concern about dragging it through a TEOTWAWKI scenario.

Yup, right now I'd go with the Enfield, given the limited choices.

One of the main reasons I didn't choose the Mosin Nagant is the sticky bolt syndrome most suffer from. Given the surplus ammo we'd have on hand, extraction could be a problem.
I agree about the K31 not being tested in war and with the cam action of the bolt. But I also think that with the rotating bolt design having been used for so many years in Swiss rifles, they have perfected it in the K31 style. I'm not about to drag any of mine around in the dirt to test them out though.
As for the Enfield... its high number magazine capability is a plus. Those extra 4 shots could mean the diference in life and death. But much like the 91/30, the 303 is a rimmed cartridge and requires careful arangement in a stripper clip, and the bayonet is a spike. A short one at that. While it and the 91/30's bayonet may penetrate easier, I still don't think its a better substitute for the K98's blade bayonet.

 

[USMA-82]

But are we talking trench warfare, or survival? Granted, the Enfield rod bayonet sucks compared to the K98, but I wasn't really giving it much thought in the SHTF scenario you laid out. If the clips are pre-loaded and neatly carried in bandoleers, the cartridge-staggering issue would probably be no big deal.

OK, now my turn. Same scenario - pick one:

1) SKS
2) SVT-40
3) FN-49
4) Ljungman / Hakim

Intentionlly leaving out my actual choices, and any U.S. guns.

 

[SKS Ray]

But are we talking trench warfare, or survival? Granted, the Enfield rod bayonet sucks compared to the K98, but I wasn't really giving it much thought in the SHTF scenario you laid out. If the clips are pre-loaded and neatly carried in bandoleers, the cartridge-staggering issue would probably be no big deal.

OK, now my turn. Same scenario - pick one:

1) SKS
2) SVT-40
3) FN-49
4) Ljungman / Hakim

Intentionlly leaving out my actual choices, and any U.S. guns.

Could be trench warfare and survival in a SHTF situation. Think of the aisles at the grocery store as trenches. I also like the utility idea of the knife design of the K98 bayonet btw.
As for semi autos, I don't have an FN49 but imagine they function much like the Hakim and SVT40. The SVT40 is lighter than the Hakim and IMO easier to handle. But if I had to choose I'd take the SKS because its lighter, more compact, comes with a tool kit including cleaning brush, and its easier to strip down to work on. The bayonet is permanently attached to the rifle be it folded or fixed, but that can be a disadvantage since they don't have a sharp edge and can't be used seperately unless you take the mount screw out. I can load 10 round stripper clips in an SKS faster than changing a magazine, thats a plus. Its only drawback to me is the lack of power of the 7.62x39 round compared to the others in 6.5x55/8mm Mauser and 7.62x54.

 

[USMA-82]

Why did I know you'd pick the SKS?!!!!!!

It's the lightest of the group, which is great, but with a shorter effective range than the others. On the other hand (like the .223 vs .308 argument), you can carry alot more ammo for the same weight.

The SVT-40 does have the hard-hitting round, but a bit long, like the Mosin-Nagant.

I think it would be a toss-up for me between my Ljungman and FN-49, except for two points: the direct gas impingment system of the Ljungman would probably be tougher to keep clean and functioning compared to the FN-49 (piston arrangement), and the Ljungman - supposedly - requires pre-lubed cases to function smoothly. Might be a tough task in the jam.

So, the FN-49 (mine is 8mm) would be it. Ten-round detachable magazine, adjustable aperature rear sight, and the fact that it has been battle-tested, puts it over the top.

OK, what's next?

 

[SKS Ray]

Why did I know you'd pick the SKS?!!!!!!

Cause you know I love em' I even have this sticker in the rear window of my truck.
http://www.makarov.com/graphics/stickers/sksoval.jpg

 

[dwarven1]

Why did I know you'd pick the SKS?!!!!!!

It's the lightest of the group, which is great, but with a shorter effective range than the others. On the other hand (like the .223 vs .308 argument), you can carry alot more ammo for the same weight.

I'm sure I've seen this argument before, but in a TEOTWAWKI or a SHTF situation, how much sniping do you really think you're going to do? Wouldn't light weight and the ability to carry more weight be much more important? Well... OK, if you're going to bug in, the longer range might be more important and the weight load might be less so, since you're probably not going to be going on patrols or long trips.

Of course, if it's a World War Z situation, then I can see the argument for some seriously long-ranged weapons.

 

[Weerd Beard]

I've got a M44. It's a beast. The open sights are too hard to use with my old eyes, the muzzle blast is, to be polite, brisk, and the safety is unusable.

Having young eyes I wouldn't know, but can't you just use the hood on the M44 as a minute-of-man style sight? The M44 is accurate enugh that at reasonable ranges she'll make up the difference

The "brisk" muzzle-blast and recoil help make up said difference

As for the safty, if I ever feel the need to make my M44 safe with the bolt closed I just lift the bolt half-way and pull the trigger and gently de-cock the gun. Mechanically it's not as safe as that abomination that they call a safty, but all you need to do is cock the striker and yer in buisness, so it's FAR more practical if you ever wanted to stalk deer with a commie brick-spliller

Arrrrr

-Weer'd Beard

 

[Scrivener]

Since all are bolt guns, why no 1903 Springfield or P-17 Enfield?

In short, why no American rifle?

 

[SKS Ray]

Since all are bolt guns, why no 1903 Springfield or P-17 Enfield?

In short, why no American rifle?

I was originally going with whats most commonly available on the surplus mail order market right now and those are Enfields, Mosins, K98s and K31s.

 

[M1911]

Having young eyes I wouldn't know, but can't you just use the hood on the M44 as a minute-of-man style sight?

Using a gun with a peep sight (Enfield, AR15, M1, M1A, etc.) I can get fast hits on a man-sized target at 100 yards. With a little more care, I can easily hit man-sized targets at 300 yards (providing they aren't moving fast).

I can't come close to that with open-style sights. That's true of my M44 and also of my more accurate Swedish Mauser -- given the choice between the two, I'd take the swede.

 

[jhrosier]

....
As for the safty, if I ever feel the need to make my M44 safe with the bolt closed I just lift the bolt half-way and pull the trigger and gently de-cock the gun. Mechanically it's not as safe as that abomination that they call a safty, but all you need to do is cock the striker and yer in buisness, so it's FAR more practical if you ever wanted to stalk deer with a commie brick-spliller

Arrrrr

-Weer'd Beard

Let me get this straight...
You set the firing pin with the 25 pound spring on the live primer to make it safe?

 

[Garys]

Like Weer'd, I'd go with a SKS as a SHTF rifle. In fact, that's why I'm not blasting off my 7.62x39 ammo as much fun as it would be.

However, of the choices, I'd go with the No 4 Mk1. Technically, it would be a Mk2, but you get the idea. An action so silky smooth it should be illegal and a design proven through two world wars. The basic design that is. Having 10 rounds isn't a bad thing either.

After that, the K31, no doubt.

Fun thread,

Gary

 

[Nashmack]

I'd like to go off the board here and say model 12 trench gun with a 16" bayo.

The 12 gauge is hard to beat in a meeting engagement.

 

[SKS Ray]

I'd like to go off the board here and say model 12 trench gun with a 16" bayo.

The 12 gauge is hard to beat in a meeting engagement.

More so in my grocery store aisle trench warfare image.

 

[Weerd Beard]

I'd like to go off the board here and say model 12 trench gun with a 16" bayo.

The 12 gauge is hard to beat in a meeting engagement.

I've always found that bayo lug on the 12 guage to be a great accessory.

Arrrr

-Weer'd Beard