Did I step on a landmine? 1943 Tula refurb [PICS!!]

[Miller Tyme]

Ok I have finally got a good look at the rifle and I have no doubt this is an ex-sniper that was resnipered.

The extra hole is odd as I can't explain why it was ever drilled where it is, and the installing of a screw, the incomplete job of making it flush, and then staking it just doesn't strike me as something an Soviet armorer would do. Also the area appears to have been aggressively cleaned, but it looks from the pics like the receiver has had heat applied to it, like when you weld up an ex-sniper.
.
The mount isn't original to the scope as observed by the scope number stamped on the mount, and the scope tube having 2 different witness marks on it.

The scope is a Progress/NKV 357 built scope and was manufactured in the 1st 1/2 of 1944.

The mount is a Tula mount, just it appears to be from a 44 Tula as the stamped scope s/n on it is for a Kazan/NKV#237 scope and the s/n puts it in the 2nd half of 1944.

The bolt, well all I can say about it is it isn't one of those bolt on e-bay bolt handles, but it is pretty bad.

Now that said I am assuming you can't return it for your money back?

If not and it has a good bore I would shoot the heck out of it and enjoy it.

[jerrywyy]

Not much entertainment here. I always worry for the guy who got a reproduction sniper and was told it was real.

On the M38, it is a Izhevsk and it's not a sniper rifle. On snipers (for the most part) they took a little more time on them. On Izhevsk rifles or M38's, they sometimes had to push out rifles to meet demands. So, they cut corners. Especially some years when the Germans were right on top of the arsenals.

Darryl

Thanks Good to know, at least now I know what to look for from now on.

[tomaustin]

the market is full of "want-to-be" snipers...many true snipers exist.....there aren't as many as folks wish there were.....but the hunt is the chore and the discovery is the reward....if you are dedicated to the mosin nagant, your day may come....good luck...

[jerrywyy]

Ok I have finally got a good look at the rifle and I have no doubt this is an ex-sniper that was resnipered.

The extra hole is odd as I can't explain why it was ever drilled where it is, and the installing of a screw, the incomplete job of making it flush, and then staking it just doesn't strike me as something an Soviet armorer would do. Also the area appears to have been aggressively cleaned, but it looks from the pics like the receiver has had heat applied to it, like when you weld up an ex-sniper.
.
The mount isn't original to the scope as observed by the scope number stamped on the mount, and the scope tube having 2 different witness marks on it.

The scope is a Progress/NKV 357 built scope and was manufactured in the 1st 1/2 of 1944.

The mount is a Tula mount, just it appears to be from a 44 Tula as the stamped scope s/n on it is for a Kazan/NKV#237 scope and the s/n puts it in the 2nd half of 1944.

The bolt, well all I can say about it is it isn't one of those bolt on e-bay bolt handles, but it is pretty bad.

Now that said I am assuming you can't return it for your money back?

If not and it has a good bore I would shoot the heck out of it and enjoy it.

Alas the long awaited expert opinion! I can't really return it but the bore is indeed quite good. From now on I will more careful and patient and hope I can get a real one someday.

[jerrywyy]

the market is full of "want-to-be" snipers...many true snipers exist.....there aren't as many as folks wish there were.....but the hunt is the chore and the discovery is the reward....if you are dedicated to the mosin nagant, your day may come....good luck...

Thanks buddy!

[jerrywyy]

Ok I have finally got a good look at the rifle and I have no doubt this is an ex-sniper that was resnipered.

The extra hole is odd as I can't explain why it was ever drilled where it is, and the installing of a screw, the incomplete job of making it flush, and then staking it just doesn't strike me as something an Soviet armorer would do. Also the area appears to have been aggressively cleaned, but it looks from the pics like the receiver has had heat applied to it, like when you weld up an ex-sniper.
.
The mount isn't original to the scope as observed by the scope number stamped on the mount, and the scope tube having 2 different witness marks on it.

The scope is a Progress/NKV 357 built scope and was manufactured in the 1st 1/2 of 1944.

The mount is a Tula mount, just it appears to be from a 44 Tula as the stamped scope s/n on it is for a Kazan/NKV#237 scope and the s/n puts it in the 2nd half of 1944.

The bolt, well all I can say about it is it isn't one of those bolt on e-bay bolt handles, but it is pretty bad.

Now that said I am assuming you can't return it for your money back?

If not and it has a good bore I would shoot the heck out of it and enjoy it.

Dear Miller, upon further inspection I found a little notch on the bottom of the bolt ball, shown in the pic below.



Now according to this site (https://www.m9130.info/pu-snipers), the little notch at the bottom can suggest that the bolt is an original Tula sniper bolt. What do you think of this? Is the information on m9130 site reliable?

[ffuries]

I could be wrong as I can't get to my rifles right this minute....But I think what they are implying is one way to tell the difference between a Izhevsk and Tula bolt in general is the notch (divot) and not so much as for a sniper bolt.

I'm sure somebody will chime in with more information.......

[M62]

Now according to this site (https://www.m9130.info/pu-snipers), the little notch at the bottom can suggest that the bolt is an original Tula sniper bolt. What do you think of this? Is the information on m9130 site reliable?

From what i see your bolt have staight angle bent of the handle and not curved as Tula is.
On the left - Tula bolt, on the right - Izhevsk bolt.

your bolt


Infomation of m9130 site is reliable as it can be.