hex receiver mosin vs round receiver

Discussion in 'Curio & Relic Discussion' started by hq357, Nov 27, 2013.

  1. hq357

    hq357 New Member

    714
    0
    0
    my local big 5 is selling hexagon receiver Mosin Nagant for about 180 to 199$ but there also selling round recieviers for 130$ i think there both 91/30 why is the hex more desireable whats the difrence besides the reciever shape? Which is a better shooter? Is it worth getting a hex?
     
  2. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    No real major difference, the hex receiver is just a bit more collectible and slightly more desired by many. Plus, there just aren't as many of them floating around.

    The fit and finish is usually a little better too, as the round ones are mostly war production.
     

  3. hq357

    hq357 New Member

    714
    0
    0
    So they both perform about the same?
     
  4. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Generally, yes. The tolerances and accuracy of these rifles are so loose to begin with, that it usually comes down to the barrel. Except in my case. My Mosin was a 1938 Tula that had more rust pits than Lyndsey Lohan has freckles. It had no visible cut rifling, just a texture to the bore that looked kinda swirled. It never produced a clean patch during cleaning time the entire time I owned it. And I also could not miss a soda can at 100 yards with it.

    The accuracy of the Mosin Nagant 91/30 is sometimes pure luck of the draw. Wish I hadn't let mine go.
     
  5. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    If you're trying to round out a collection, it's worth getting a hex for historical sake...

    Trip's right, the performance difference between the two is negligible at best...

    If you just want to go BANG at the range, go with the round rec and spend the difference in price on a can or two of ammo...
     
  6. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Chainfire would be a good member who's brain you could pick over on this subject too. IIRC, he's pretty passionate about the mosins.

    Also, check out WWW.7.62x54r.net
     
  7. John_Deer

    John_Deer New Member

    6,624
    1
    0
    Here is a good site for Mosin Nagant information. The site also has a primer on selecting a decent Mosin Nagant. I paid a little more for my Mosin Nagant but I bought it locally and went through the inventory of several LGS before I found a rifle that suited me.

    http://www.milsurps.com/content.php
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2013
  8. chuckusaret

    chuckusaret Member

    509
    0
    16
    I own several round and hex receiver 91/30's, all shoot the same. Will they every have any collector value? IMO, No, not unless they were produced by Remington or Westinghouse.
     
  9. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Did Winchester make them too? Or was that the Enfield they were making under contract? Or am I completely lost?
     
  10. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    15
    38
    yes and no. depends on the barrel.

    most all of em were rebarrelled after the war with war production barrels and then put into storage
     
  11. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    13
    38
    Yes. No one Mosin is exactly predictable, but in 9 out of 10 the barrel condition will make all the difference.

    The rounded receiver was introduced as the Soviet government was preparing for war. No chance it would have been weaker than the original.
     
  12. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    52
    48
    A lot of the difference is strictly cosmetic. I think I have pics on here of a peak war time production round receiver and a Pre War Hex receiver Mosin, side by side. The Russians were not changing out tooling as frequently, so there are machining chatter marks, rough grind mark lines, and pretty much just the bare essential machining done to make the rifle functional on the 1943 model that I have. There was no thumb notch cut, and the side wall was not recessed. The stripper clip guide does not have the extra relief cuts in it.

    Shooting both rifles side by side though, I got roughly the same accuracy (1.75"-3" groups depending on ammo used, when shot from a bench at 100 yards). The bolt operation and trigger are slightly smoother on the pre-war model.

    I paid something like $99 for the war time model and $105 for the hex model a year or so ago. Turned out that the prewar model also had a crack in the stock, so I did some work repairing teh stock with epoxy and brass screws and bedding the action in the stock. So the war time one was a bit of a project that started out shooting 8" groups, but ended up being capable of the same level of accuracy as the pre-war model after some work.
     
  13. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Also part of the reason for the change in design, simple manufacturing advances. Nothing conspiratorial or earth shattering. It just became more efficient and cost effective to machine them that way.
     
  14. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    52
    48
    Here is a recap of the work I did on the war-time Mosin to repair the cracked stock.

    [​IMG]

    Got caught up in all the Mosin madness a while back and picked one up for $99. I took it shooting and found that it grouped like a shotgun, (Nearly 10" groups at 100 yds.). I took it home and did a more thorough cleaning in good light and found that the stock was cracked under the receiver. you can also see that the rear area of the stock where the tang sits is uneven and makes for a poor contact area to bed the action. This may have contributed to the cracking in the first place.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I took this as an opportunity to try some stock repair techniques and see what kind of accuracy I can wring out of the rifle.

    Here I put some epoxy in the crack and then used some wood clamps to clamp the stock together, then drilled the stock and put ins some brass screws to reenforce the stock and prevent the crack from traveling under recoil.

    [​IMG]

    After cutting the screws off close to the stock, I used a fine file to take them flush to the wood.

    [​IMG]

    Next I decided to try to take care of the bedding surfaces for the action and the recoil lug area to not only make a secure bed for the action, but to also help make a solid fit that would prevent future cracking. I used JB Weld as my bedding compound and paste wax as my release agent when bedding the action.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    As long as I had it apart I figured I'd check the barrel channel to see if there were any tight spots for the barrel that could put uneven pressure on the barrel, affecting harmonics and shifts as the barrel would heat up. I slid a piece of paper under the barrel to identify tight areas where the paper would drag, and marked these areas with a pencil. Then I used a deep well socket and some sand paper to locate and smooth out the tight spots. I did this through the barrel channel up to the area about two inches forward of the flare in the barrel near the action, until the paper would travel smoothly down the barrel channel.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Some rifles will do ok if the barrel is floated for the full length of the barrel channel, while other like to have some upward pressure in the last couple inches of the barrel channel. Thin cork was used by the Finns when they accurized Mosins and placed in the end of the barrel channel to apply this pressure. The Finns also used metal shims in the tang area and lug area as well as under the trigger guard to provide a bedding surface for the action.[/QUOTE]
     
  15. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    52
    48
    And here was some of the ammo/accuracy testing after the repair work:

    After the repair work I took the rifle to the range with several loads to see if I had made any headway, as well as find out if the rifle had an ammo preference.

    Russian Surplus 147 gr light ball ammo. This was the first load fired and is showed that headway had definitely been made.
    [​IMG]

    TulAmmo 148 gr.
    [​IMG]

    Czech Surplus 147 gr, and the Winchester 180 gr load which is actually made by Sellor and Bellot.
    [​IMG]

    Brown Bear "Match" 174 gr
    [​IMG]

    So, I went from a rifle shooting 10" to 1-3" groups depending on ammo and shooter. I also found that the rifle did like a pressure pad in the barrel channel for the last inch toward the muzzle. I used buisiness card stock until groups tightened.
     
  16. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    52
    48
    Here are some pics of the war-time receiver compared to pre-war hex receiver. War-time receiver is out of the stock while I was making repairs.

    Here's some pics ofd differences between a wartime receiver (round 1943) and a prewar hex receiver. You can definitely see that the Russians were cranking them out for function as fast as they could when the Nazis were on their door step.

    [​IMG]

    1925 hex markings. Also note the machining is much smoother. This is made in the same factory as the 1943 in these pictures. Big differences in the details. Also, the bolt operates much smoother on the '25 even when I get it hot with laquer coated ammo which some people have tried to convince me will melt when it's hot and stick the bolt shut (Haven't experienced it myself with hot Mosins though after I've scrobbed the chambers completely free of cosmoline.)
    [​IMG]

    Markings on a "peak of war time" 1943:
    [​IMG]
     
  17. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    13
    38
    Melting cases jamming the rifle? After not being a problem throughout WW2? In Japanese they call it "bullshido".

    The wartime production rifles may look rougher cosmetically, but it has no effect on the receivers, round or not. Too much is often made of the wartime production stamps. The rifles were made hundreds of miles behind the front line, with all standards strictly enforced. The T34 tank was at least as good rolling out in '42 as in '40. The deficiencies of wartime Mosins are cosmetic, immaterial, or nonexistent. The bore condition overrides any possible or imaginary difference regardless of the year stamp.
     
  18. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Actually, the lacquer used to coat some cases is well known to melt and jam up the action on a mosin. It usually happens when the chamber hasn't been cleaned quite thoroughly enough after long post war storage.
     
  19. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    13
    38
    Well known. Source?
     
  20. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,925
    52
    48
    As was just said, people have claimed the lacquer on the cases would melt. I haven't seen it since most laquer has a pretty high melting point, and some laquer coatings are actually baked on. I think some folks confuse some of the problems experienced with polymer coated steel cases in AR-15s with problems in other completely different rifles. Now Cosmoline has some bees wax in it that some solvents don't get rid of, but use of a chamber brush and mineral spirits seems to solve that problem. Most of the war time ammo and even post war Russian ammo was not laquer coated anyway. Most was copper washed.

    I agree that the war time differences were mainly cosmetic. Some surfaces are left kind of rough, and I do gt some grittiness on the war time trigger, but it still functions just fine. The bolt is a bit tighter and rougher in cycling, but still works fine.