Found a Molot M24

[millman]

Just kidding.

[WeldonHunter]

Just kidding.

It could happen!!

[BuckeyeSgt]

[Jumperwire]

[zeebill]

I am and have been just a little scared of what we may find coming from them next and because of that I wonder if the Molot rifle family may suffer decreased value in the long run among collectors eventually. I mean now they are being accepted rather freely but will that continue later on? Molot M24? I would say look real close at what you find and where you get it from because the sky may indeed be the limit here. Bill

[Rongo]

Very funny.... I'll start getting concerned when you find a Molot with a Nazi Death-head stamp on it.

[Three_Dogs]

[joe7170]

My god, dare I say Molot is becoming the Mitchell's Mauser of Russia?

[desdem12]

[Junk Yard Dog]

Not becoming , I think they are there already. Mitchell's has a business plan that works well, they make money catering to the crowd that wants a rifle "like they saw in the movies" but in reality care only superficially at best about the history, and just want something that "looks good". To their typical buyer the rifle is a fad of the moment and in a few months they will be into whatever is the fad of the moment then. That and the ones who really just want a shooter, and think how the rifle looks will effect how it shoots. The Russians aren't stupid, they see the Ukrainians have the market with the collectors selling all the Soviet refurbished stuff, they aim to take a slice of Mitchell's market share.

[Homer2]

I don't see this happening. The M38s, M44s and other refurbs coming out of Molot look like refurbs from Ukraine to me. There's no money in putting a lot of labor into a surplus soviet rifle which is sold at a low price.

I don't understand this recent Molot bashing, or the need to delegitimze anything odd coming in with a Molot mark. I'd there is solid information such as with Mitchell's, or a deliberate intent to deceive buyers and make inaccurate claims about super rare items, I've not seen it.

Vic initially said he saw what he feels are legit snipers coming out of Molot, and my guess is the other surplus they've been able to get imported are cold war stocks which may or may not have an extra coat of shellac slapped on and shipped.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

[Junk Yard Dog]

I don't see this happening. The M38s, M44s and other refurbs coming out of Molot look like refurbs from Ukraine to me. There's no money in putting a lot of labor into a surplus soviet rifle which is sold at a low price.

I don't understand this recent Molot bashing, or the need to delegitimze anything odd coming in with a Molot mark. I'd there is solid information such as with Mitchell's, or a deliberate intent to deceive buyers and make inaccurate claims about super rare items, I've not seen it.

Vic initially said he saw what he feels are legit snipers coming out of Molot, and my guess is the other surplus they've been able to get imported are cold war stocks which may or may not have an extra coat of shellac slapped on and shipped.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

Bashing?? We are collectors and question everything is what we do. No one here has any financial intrest in Molot rifles, we are the target market for this company's products and I will damn well question anything someone is trying to sell me on be it products , politics, whatever. I have seen too much bullshit come and go be it Mitchell's or Gibbs, Molot is just the latest to come along and try to make money off the collector market. How many people were fooled by the " original" German K98k's from Mitchell's, or the 7.62mm No7 carbine from Gibb's when they first hit the market? It took questioning and time before it was figured out that both were bullshit. Years back I saw one of the Gibbs 7.62mm carbines in a gunshop, looked real nice, original Indian army carbine, no information about them , but what the hell, it looks real. I bought the damn thing, still have it, it was two years before the word got around that they were fakes made by Gibbs who shortened 7.62mm 2A rifles and refinished them. Worthless shit that I keep to remind myself to always look the gift horse in the mouth, you bet your ass I will question every Molot Mosin I see, and keep on doing it . Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice shame on me.

[zeebill]

[quote="Homer2"]I don't see this happening. The M38s, M44s and other refurbs coming out of Molot look like refurbs from Ukraine to me. There's no money in putting a lot of labor into a surplus soviet rifle which is sold at a low price.

Homer I think the snipers attributed to them were a little more than low priced in my eyes and yes I do question the validity of them but I wouldn't call that bashing in any stretch of the imagination. What exactly is the average wage of a Russian working for Molot and how many other jobs are available to them? They got to be what we refer to as minimum wage workers I would bet and they will spend quite awhile on a low priced rifle where we knowing how lucky we are to make what we do even today would say it is not worth it. I have talked to many people who go over there to search for rifles to import in the tens of thousands and they have told me many of the areas these folks have to work in resemble the old Gulags of yesteryear. They indeed may work hard and long on a low priced rifle in my eyes, so question the validity of stuff coming out of Molot whether others endorse it or not I will reserve the right to do. Bill

[Greasemonkey]

There's no money in putting a lot of labor into a surplus soviet rifle which is sold at a low price.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

With current exchange rates, an abundant supply of parts, cheap labor and access to a completely outfitted arsenal why not do it. No company would jump into an investment of that size, setting up the import/export supply chain, and setting up offices over seas only to plan on going broke. There would have to be a decent profit margin in there somewhere, or it would be a pointless venture that could cost Molot's investors a pile of Rubles.

[Darryl]

Why is we are said to be "bashing" when we are just asking legitimate questions (most of us are anyways) about the handling of these rifles? Molot refuses to answer emails and phone calls about this subject which only fuels that fire. Molot has had a very questionable past history when it comes to preservation (which is what this forum is about). We know they have "made" snipers and a shortened version in the past. Chrome lined barrels, and fake snipers, so why wouldn't we question their motives now?

Questions are how you get answers. On these forums we are not bound by the "sponsors" that are making a profit from these rifles, so we can ask the questions without having to "please" a sponsor. These forums are a "not for profit" organization. We have Advertisers here and they are just barely paying the bills here. So we are under no obligated to them. If they want to sell Molot, that is fine, but we are not their "salesman" for them. They stand on their own.

So if we ask the questions, .......why is that so "threatening" to some? I know there is a huge desire for these to be "original" and I get that. I hope they are also, but I can't see turning a blind eye just to get a cheap Mosin. If they are legitimate, then they will stand on their own. If not, there will be a lot of disappointed people that own them. We are collectors and always ask questions about rifles (all rifles when we buy them). If you are buying them just as shooters, then I guess there is nothing wrong with them. I suspect they would make great shooters. But our primary goals here is Preservation and Collecting.

There are many things showing up on these M44's and M38's that are not typical to any of the Ukraine refurbed rifles. Things like M38's made from M91's (M91/38?). They are neither M38, or M91/38's. But were imported only by Molot. So who made those? Why are they only showing up in Molots rifles? The rear sights on them have a totally different configuration than any of the M38's or M91/38's. So who made those and when, and from what? These are questions we ask. They are very important questions to all collectors.

If they are legit, they will be able to stand up to the questions and will in the end be accepted by the collectors here. If they are not, then they won't. We will make up our own minds after we ask our questions and get our answers.


Now personally........I am still on the fence on these rifles. I'm waiting for someone to show me something more then what I have seen so far. Before I (personally) would buy one or recommend one. I am one of the lucky ones that have most all the carbines and refurbs I need for now (not that I wouldn't buy another if it was right for "my" collection). But with Molots past and some of the huge discrepancies I have seen on these rifles, I will spend my money on something that is a "known" for now. Why not, there are known non Molot rifles out there for the same price. I think there are too many people willing to look the other way when it comes to these Molot rifles and I ask the question....why is that? But this is just my opinion and you can drop it in the crapper if you like.

We will continue to allow them on the forums here until something changes. Asking questions about any rifles is encouraged here on this forum. It is what we do here and how the new members and collectors learn. You only have to stay inside the rules of preservation we have and keep it civil (and enjoy yourselves )

Dolk

[Homer2]

I really don't care one way or another because I have very little to no interest in refurb rifles. I do think that there is a lot of difference in the way Mitchell's operates and the way that many are equating that same model to Molot. There is a difference in questing this crop of refurbs coming out of Russia as compared to Ukranian refurbs, (which is an interesting topic with a lot if information and markings to compare and contrast), and calling them a bunch of hosers who are the same as Mitchell's. They are hosers for sure, but why are these refurbs different than others?

I wasn't trying to piss anyone off, nor was my first post an indictment on others or a criticism. Still seems to have had that effect. I follow lots of boards, and was making an observation on what seems to be a bunch of strong opinions here against Molot, but being expressed in a particular way.

Why exactly are these current batch of refurbs from Molot so suspect?

[Celt]

Look what you did!
shame on you
This is becoming one of those subjects...

[Junk Yard Dog]

We know what the Ukrainian rifles are, it's no secret, Weapons refurbished by the SOviet Union for a war that never came. We do not know what the Molots are, we know they are Mosins, but they appear to have a much more recent refurbishment than any Ukrainian refurb. The Ukrainian rifles all show their age in various ways, how often have we had questions about stabilizing cracking shellac, black paint falling off the handguard caps, that sort of thing, yet these Molot rifles look like the refurb jobs were done yesterday, if so then who did it? I am not a huge fan of refurbs either, but I am willing to accept the Ukrainian refurbs because they were done by the government of the USSR in a government arsenal, and they are a legitimate part of Cold War history. Molot is a commercial enterprise, they are not a government arsenal any more than I am. If I was to take a Balkans Mosin and refinish it I would unquestionably be a Bubba. How would my doing that be any different than a private company doing the same, as Mitchell's has done for years? Whatever history was on the rifles Molot sells was scrubbed off them with their original finishes, and the reapplied finish lacks any historical legitimacy whatever. It isn't part of WW2 history, or Cold War history, it is a finish applied in an effort to pretty up relics of history so they will appeal to a segment of milsurp buyers who are about appearance rather than originality or history.
In short these are Molot refurbs, not Soviet refurbs, and it would seem not Russian Federation refurbs either, they are not the product of any government arsenals refurb program, or Molot would have owned up to it by now. I collect relics of history, I prefer them in the state they were in when last in government service and with no alterations made after it left that service. I also don't understand why the very fact that questions are raised about the background of these rifles causes any notice, or stink as I hear it has in some corners. Calling something into question that doesn't look right is what starts people digging into the background of whatever it is and in time information comes to light. That is how we know what we do about the Soviet rifles imported from Ukrain. People saw what looked like all these unissued rifles on the market and wanted to know what they were and were they came from.
I know some people have a vested intrest, financial or otherwise, in these rifles. They bought them themselves and have that investment to guard, plus should these rifles be exposed as commercial refurbs they do not want to look the fool. Been there and done that with the No7 Gibbs. Or they depend on advertising revenues, or sponsorships from company's selling these rifles who do not want questions raised that might slow sales. I do not own one of these rifles, I accept no sponsorships of any sort from company's selling these rifles. If I see something that reminds me of the Gibbs experiance, and I am seeing that every time I see a Molot refurb, I will pipe up and point out the issues that bother me.

[Darryl]

I really don't care one way or another because I have very little to no interest in refurb rifles. I do think that there is a lot of difference in the way Mitchell's operates and the way that many are equating that same model to Molot. There is a difference in questing this crop of refurbs coming out of Russia as compared to Ukranian refurbs, (which is an interesting topic with a lot if information and markings to compare and contrast), and calling them a bunch of hosers who are the same as Mitchell's. They are hosers for sure, but why are these refurbs different than others?

I wasn't trying to piss anyone off, nor was my first post an indictment on others or a criticism. Still seems to have had that effect. I follow lots of boards, and was making an observation on what seems to be a bunch of strong opinions here against Molot, but being expressed in a particular way.

Why exactly are these current batch of refurbs from Molot so suspect?

"IF" molot is refinishing (refurbing in your words) there rifle (which is the question I would like answered), then they are exactly like Mitchell's. Molot and Mitchell's are not government agencies, they are companies in the business of refinishing rifles to make them pretty and selling them for a profit. Neither are and arsenal, and as we draw the line on when a rifles becomes a "Military Surplus Rifle" at the point it leaves the arsenal, any work done after that point is not part of the military history and would be looked down on by preservationists. If that is not a big deal to someone, then they can't complain if any Tom, Dick, or Harry refinish the rifles in their garage either.

Now, this is all assuming that Molot has refinished these rifles. If they haven't, then good.

If they have, then they are exactly like a Mitchell's Mauser.

"IF" Molot refinished these rifles, then you can't say that Mitchell's is a "bad" company and they ruin military surplus rifles and not say the same thing about Molot. That is what some people are talking about here. So we need to ask the questions so we can find the answers. Obviously some people here have already made up their minds, and some are still asking questions. I don't see why that is so threatening to anyone else, unless they have some other agenda.

I don't care one way or another, but this is a "learning forum". We are not here to just spit out what someone else says and march lock step like a bunch of lemmings. We are here to ask the questions and learn and make an "informed" decision. What could be wrong with that?


Dolk

[redeuce]

I really don't care one way or another because I have very little to no interest in refurb rifles. I do think that there is a lot of difference in the way Mitchell's operates and the way that many are equating that same model to Molot. There is a difference in questing this crop of refurbs coming out of Russia as compared to Ukranian refurbs, (which is an interesting topic with a lot if information and markings to compare and contrast), and calling them a bunch of hosers who are the same as Mitchell's. They are hosers for sure, but why are these refurbs different than others?

I wasn't trying to piss anyone off, nor was my first post an indictment on others or a criticism. Still seems to have had that effect. I follow lots of boards, and was making an observation on what seems to be a bunch of strong opinions here against Molot, but being expressed in a particular way.

Why exactly are these current batch of refurbs from Molot so suspect?

Here would be your first clues:
1) Not one of the M38's has showed up counter bored.
2) One of the Molot markings is under the barrel. This throws the whole"it's only wiped off with a rag" theory out the window, because to put this stamp on, the rifle has to be disassembled.
3) Neither Molot or any of the dealers distributing these rifles will comment when asked the origin of these rifles.
4) All the existing, known rifles are selling for a lot more money. All of a sudden, Molot snipers are over $200 cheaper, the M44's and M38's are $50-$75 cheaper.Why would pristine, shiny bored, almost perfect examples sell for so much less than the going rate unless there was something up? I suspect these are dirt cheap for the importer, because they are a re refurbished hunting rifle. Why are all the bayos off the M44's? It can't be a legal issue, they are still in the box.
5) The primary support group for these rifles is a board that has Classic and Aim as major sponsors.
6) A disturbing trend is developing on GB. It's obvious that many bought several of these rifles, and now they are trying to double their money on GB to unsuspecting buyers. Coincidentally, many of the ads forget to mention Molot in the ad, and forget to photo the Molot marking.
I won't touch one with a ten foot poll.

Everyone should read this-viewtopic.php?f=64&t=11391 There is also a you tube video