So, who is showing up for Quantico Sniper Match w/ your PU ?

[SA1911a1]

For me, 600 yards is driving distance, 800 and I am thinking flight time.

[SA1911a1]

It really does sound like a lot of fun.

In my old age I have even given up fishing because it is too much like work. Twenty years ago, and I would have been game to learn to shoot long distance, but then I was too busy scraping out a living.

There is a lesson here.

[Celt]

If it was closer I'd be there with irons.

[Junk Yard Dog]

Distance was never my thing, shitty eyesight at best. 1000 yards? Park my Model A out there and let me see you put a tire iron through the windshield and then you will see some great 1000 yard shooting, but I will be using my tuned Savage 110 with the Hubble telescope mounted on it for the job.

[Greasemonkey]

Way to much traffic on that side of the state. besides I despise I-95 much less going east of it.

[Junk Yard Dog]

I don't know anything about tossing tire irons but if I had an inclination to shoot, I would take some initiative and
do so. THe PU has a scope so you got help with failing eye sight.

I am 65 yrs old, I shoot 100 to 1000 yds with the PU easily and so can you. I shoot iron sights 100 to 1000 yds with No.4 Enfeild but
have to wear a diopter on my glasses (Eye Pal USA). I only began shooting distance in the last 12 months, up till then, 500 yds
was my longest shooting and that was but a few times. You just got to have a range and desire to do this stuff. Ranges are the
long pole in the tent .

If you let life go by making excuses for not trying to shoot distances, you are missing out on life. The fact is, you can do right
well shooting distances and the PU will let you do so. So..........Junkyard , time to man up and get on the firing line.

Come down from NY and shoot with me at Quantico, we can cure you of the Governor Cuomo Short Range Shooting Virus

I rarely shoot at all anymore, most of my time during daylight hours is taken up with working so I can pay the taxes our esteemed governor has seen fit to saddle us with here in NY. I have shot distance in the past, been there and done that years ago, in the mid 2000's I was shooting 100-150 rounds a day every afternoon when I had daylight to see, and 600 rounds or more during an away shoot with friends. Twenty years of that gets old after awhile, and expensive these days. A vacation for me is a Sunday in October when I head north to shoot at a friends place out to 300 yards, plenty of time to rest and relax after I am dead.

[catcracker]

Wow. Just saw this post. I haven't shot my sniper yet. But I would still be interested in doing this sometime. But I need many many months notice to arrange time off. Just FYI for me.
Cat

[Hlavinka]

I ventured down to Quantico to watch on the first day. I had the pleasure to meet some really interesting shooters, active duty, retired and civilian. I'll be back.

[Ironnewt]

Quantico is a really neat place to shoot. I shot in a Bullseye Pistol match there years ago and the Gunnery Sergeant running the range reminded us that all the brass had to be picked up including the .22lrs. He did not make us count them but damn if he didn't see the few that we missed. Great place though.

make sure you post info on the Fall match. Maybe some of us can show up with a little more notice.

[Sgt. Rob]

Sounds like a great match, too bad Quantico is so freaking far away! Milprileb, can you give us some info on the PU sniper rifle that you used? Is it the RGuns real deal or ???? Either way have you done any work other than load development to improve accuracy or is it out of the box?? This is rather interesting to me.

Semper Fi, Rob

[catcracker]

"For me, its not the source of who sold me the rifle , its the rifle and if it stands the tests
and holds its own, its good to go. By every nuance , these are 43 Izhevsk snipers."

I think you hit it on the head. The key is how you judge it. For you it's how it performs. If the parts were originally one family during the rifle's sniper life, is secondary. Others move the priority the other way around. Knowing it was a true sniper, used as a sniper is priority one, and may only be a wall hanger in performance. Most hope to get the best of both worlds.

Everyone should purchase what they feel is important. I, and others have said that they have made purchases because the rifle spoke to them. I think that is another way of saying it meets your priorities. Enjoy!!



Amature Collector, Cat

[Junk Yard Dog]

"Now here is my line in the sand.I don't much care to debate the birth certificate nor legitimacy of the PU sniper. I consider all PU Snipers
that are rebuilt to be original WWII Soviet PU sniper rifle parts made back into a PU sniper rifle. That is along the same lines as a
CMP M1 Garand that is Service Grade or Correct Grade: one of my rifles is "Correct" as all parts are Izhevsk, the other is a Service Grade
as all parts are not Izhevsk. That allows me to honestly say my PU snipers are not original as issued but are, in fact, made of original
parts. Post war rebuilds are just that: not original."

Such is the difference between someone who's main focus is shooting, and one who's focus is collecting, to a collector legitimacy is everything and most couldn't give a rats ass how the rifle shoots. Some in fact would be horrified at the suggestion a rifle be brought out of the glass case and actually fired, most however fall in the middle range. Myself, I fall in the middle, I never added a rifle to the collection with the expectation that it would be a phenomenal shooter, but I did expect originality, a rifle unaltered since it last left government ownership. A few times over the years I was disappointed and found something that had been altered in some way, as Gibbs rifles did back in the day with Enfields and Molot does today with the Mosin. Live and learn, and attempt not to make the same mistakes over again. I have a rack full of commercial sporters that will punch the same holes through the same paper targets over and over again, I had them before I ever acquired my first millsurp, so how well a milsurp shoots is immaterial to me, I collect millsurps for the history they represent. For the opportunity to own a small piece of history that I can hold in my hands. To examine that piece of history and know that this rifle could have been used at Stalingrad, Gettysburg, Yorktown, Anzio, Meuse-Argonne, Kursk, The Crimea, Guadalcanal, or the thousand and one other places were history was made. To me the Soviet refurbs come as close to fake as I am willing to go, but even they are a piece of Cold War history, and the Cold War dominated the history of the 20th century and a good chunk of my lifetime. The Soviet refurbished Mosin is still a rifle done over by official government arsenals during the time period of the Cold War, as such is has legitimacy among serious collectors, most of them anyway. Molot reworks, Gibbs creations, Mitchell's Mauser's fabrications, and cobbled together PU snipers made by US importers or home workshop Bubba's may suffice as shooters, but to a collector they are nothing more than shadows of what they once were. Modern created representations of history rather than actual pieces of real history.

[catcracker]

We are getting way off topic.
Milprileb, please see this sticky on this section.
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=556
While you are correct on saying nobody for sure knows the true story behind the Molot rifles. I believe a lot more is known about the RGuns snipers.
Hopefully we will learn, that in fact, all are true snipers. Until then, there will be disagreements. If what you got makes you happy, then .
I see no problems people wanting and having fun with Molot rifles.
Cat

PS Further talks should probably be discussed in the Molot and Waffen Schumacher (Sub-Forum)
viewforum.php?f=64
Just sayin.

[Junk Yard Dog]

This is a discussion, not a fight or argument .. right? So here is my reply and its not an attack:


So a Molot is a Cold War example .. I buy that.
However, since you can't prove a thing that a Molot is not coming out of Russian / Ukrainian military stores / war reserves,
then all I got is YOUR OPINION on what is real and what is not. Now...your opinion is respected for it satisfies your desires / end state
and that is just fine. Does not mean you are correct or that you are wrong regarding Molots or R Guns rifles .

Now , I don't care if my rifle is a pile of Soviet WWII correct parts or was made in 1943 and rebuilt by Soviets in 1955 and later sold / exported to USA by Molot.
Its not original, I know that but it is a PU sniper and whoever imported it here has nothing to do with it being what it is: arsenal post WWII rebuilt rifle. It is that.

If the litmus test of what is / is not a PU sniper is opinions, then this discussion is moot. It is moot but maybe someday something definitive will leak out on the history of Molots and R Guns and other PU snipers and definitively establish their true lineage and history. That day is not here yet.

So Junk Yard, its not going to rain on my parade to find out you can prove a Molot is commercial fabrication using WWII parts, I bought the rifle anticipating all WWII parts and if my Molot is not out of military stores/ war reserves, no big let down. It is what I thought it to be: all WWII sniper parts and by the way it shoots, the barrel is top shelf sniper grade too.

In summation: I don't accept without proof your absolute condemnation of a Molot not being a real PU sniper mandate / assertion , ----nothing personal here. I also don't accept my rifle is original but the sum of the parts certainly are PU sniper. What I won't do is slam your R Guns or other sourced snipers as being suspect of anything. Why? because I don't know their real origin and by the way: neither do you.

However, whatever is the truth and the real history on Molots, bring on the Answer Man and put the Molot issue to rest.

Actually I was not talking about Molot snipers when I mentioned the Cold War collectibles, I was talking about Soviet refurbished Mosins done 1945-1991 as we are familiar with from the hoard brought out of Ukrain. We are as yet not sure what exactly a Molot is. We know at least some of it was produced during the Soviet era, we know many of them exhibit characteristics of a more modern refurbishment, we know Molot is a Russian Commercial firearms company and what they sell here was procured, or produced inside Russia. As we know so little about Molot Mosins I do not include them when I am talking about Cold War era milsurps, at best they are shooters, or modern representations of WW2 battle rifles possibly incorporating new made parts. Molot by the way makes no claim to these rifles being original, or milsurps, they call them hunting rifles, unlike Mitchell's Mauser's Molot does not bullshit us. We could be years figuring out just what Molot is, this is an issue for collectors more than shooters as the rifles seem to do just fine on the range. I take Molot at their word, they sell hunting rifles, not milsurps, and they are of no particular intrest to me as I have enough hunting rifles . I do not question R Guns snipers, others more interested in them have already done that and determined that they are exactly what they look like, typical Soviet refurbished PU snipers imported from the same Ukrainian Soviet stockpile as any other red stock Soviet refurbished Mosin imported in the previous 14 years. To me PU's are interesting from a historical perspective, Soviet snipers exacted a terrible revenge on the Germans with these rifles, often racking up kill totals the Grim Reaper would be proud of. Other than that I see them as a nice M91/30 Soviet Mosin with a crappy 40's era Soviet scope stuck on it that was adequate for the job at hand, but by modern standards, or WW2 German standards does not compare well. Then again it shouldn't be asked to, it was a product of it's time, and the Soviets were not known as the worlds best lens makers during that era, or later for that matter. As far as who has the best PU, or the most original, or the most accurate, Molot or R Guns, I don't have a dog in that fight, I pick R Guns because it satisfies my criteria for being an original Soviet refurb, something that matters to me only from a collectors viewpoint. I have an original PU, one that is unquestionably East Block and have no intention of adding any more. R Guns or otherwise, I would spend the $900 on a couple of Finn M39's a rifle that from a shooters perspective outshoots most PU snipers without a scope on it, and from a collectors perspective is a highly sought after historical WW2 collectable rifle.

your absolute condemnation of a Molot not being a real PU sniper

I went back and reread my statement, I do not present any condemnation of Molots products, I simply take them at their own word concerning what they are, as I stated above. Molot calls their rifles hunting rifles, therefor to me that is what they are, why would Molot lie, if they were going to do that they would have stated that these were 100% original WW2 battle rifle right out of storage in Volgograd ( Stalingrad), but they make no such statements. I have made no comments as to the the shooting characteristics of Molot rifles, I would expect them to be excellent, a better bet as a shooter than most WW2 refurbs, doubly so if the barrels are in fact new as some suspect they are. From my collectors viewpoint Molot is of no intrest to me, and I would not recommend them to someone who is looking for a historical rifle rather than a shooter ( because once again, Molot claims these are hunting rifles not milsurps). If a shooter is what someone wants then by all means, get a Molot.

[Longcolt44]

Can we see your score cards?

[Sgt. Rob]

Could it possibly be that Molot calls them hunting rifles, so as to circumvent Russia's rules about exporting historical artifacts?

Semper Fi, Rob

[Junk Yard Dog]

Unlikely Rob, the Russian government isn't stupid, and they would have to be who is supplying Molot with the Mosins they use for the rebuilds. I think their laws cover things like medals, and flags much more so than weapons that are under heavy restriction when being exported or imported anyway.

[paske]

If I call a cat a dog, what is it?