| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Mosin Nagant Rifle
Additional Images
Discussion
Talk
The portion of the stock grippied by the firing hand is called the wrist on firearms like this. - Pyrewyrm.
M*A*S*H M44s
Wouldn't it be more likely that the M44s used by the Chinese and North Korean soldiers on this show were actually Chinese Type 53s? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M44_Carbine#China
- We deal with what the prop weapon is, not what would be more "realistic" for it to be. The Wierd It (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2013 (EST)
- According to the wikipedia entry, many Type 53s were imported from China to the US, so it's possible that these are Type 53, but there's no way to be sure. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:51, 23 February 2013 (EST)
Need Mosin Nagant rifle expertise for article!
Hey guys! I've just finished providing photos for a Finnish war movie called "Raja 1918" (The Border 1918) and I could use your expertise regarding the Mosin Nagant rifles used in the movie. I'm no expert on MN rifles so I want your help! Dudester32 14:10, 5 March 2013 (EST)
Same model image ?
That File:Mosin18913rd.jpg is same image as File:Mosin-Nagant-M1891-Infantry.jpg ? -- KINKI'boy (talk) 23:36, 24 March 2018 (JST)
- Similar but not exactly the same. Mosin18913rd is a late version of M91 Infantry, with fully enclosed handguard, while Mosin-Nagant-M1891-Infantry is an original version with open-top handguard. But generally this is the same model. Greg-Z (talk) 12:36, 24 March 2018 (EDT)
Splitting the mega Mosin-Nagant section
So I feel like the Mosin-Nagant section is getting quite large and encompassing too many variants at once. Would it be a good idea to split the section into multiple sub-variants? I just want some approval from senior members before I actually start on it. --Wuzh (talk) 12:09, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- I don't think that it's a good idea. All MN rifles are generally the same model, differ only in barrel length and some other details. We keep all Beretta 92 versions on a single page, right? It's the same case. Greg-Z (talk) 12:33, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- I think he means splitting the one page into multiple sections, not multiple pages. Similar to the aforementioned Beretta, the whole family is on one page, but all the different variants are in separate sections on the page. As for my thoughts on the matter, it'd certainly be a good idea, but quite a daunting task - the Mosin was made in the millions, so they're in a whole lot of different movies and the like. It'd definitely be a good idea to make a "variant unknown" section, similar to the Sten and Desert Eagle pages. Also, a little tip: if you click on each photo, you can see where it's used, in order to figure out which variants have appeared where. Best of luck, Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- If it can be pinpointed which variant was used where, certainly could divide out the variants - we've done it on other rifle pages. That said, the standard long rifles will be toughest as there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between them. The carbines and sniper versions not so difficult to differentiate so perhaps that could be a good place to start. I agree also about a 'variant unknown' section as a kind of buffer. Even then still a lot of work though, as also noted pointed out. Indeed, good luck. StanTheMan (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- Great. Thanks for the encouragement guys. I'll start by splitting out the Obrez. --Wuzh (talk) 23:02, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- I still object. I made a large contribution in MN page and can say that the exact model of long rifles - M91 Infantry, M91 Dragoon and M91/30 - cannot be identified for sure in many cases. Even M38 Carbines can be mixed up with 91/30 when the gun is seen only partially. So placing a movie into one or another section could be very hypothetical. I would like to know - why any splitting of this page is so dire need? When it works, don't fix it, you know. Greg-Z (talk) 02:17, 4 January 2019 (EST)
- The section is getting way too long. It is inevitable that we will split things up when sections grow too large. The entire AK family could just be one very, very, very large table covering all the AK-47s, AK-74s, foreign AKs, and modified AKs, and it would be very hard to read and navigate. Sooner or later we will have to split things up, and the more we delay it, the harder it will be to split it. --Wuzh (talk) 02:43, 4 January 2019 (EST)
- I still object. I made a large contribution in MN page and can say that the exact model of long rifles - M91 Infantry, M91 Dragoon and M91/30 - cannot be identified for sure in many cases. Even M38 Carbines can be mixed up with 91/30 when the gun is seen only partially. So placing a movie into one or another section could be very hypothetical. I would like to know - why any splitting of this page is so dire need? When it works, don't fix it, you know. Greg-Z (talk) 02:17, 4 January 2019 (EST)
- Great. Thanks for the encouragement guys. I'll start by splitting out the Obrez. --Wuzh (talk) 23:02, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- If it can be pinpointed which variant was used where, certainly could divide out the variants - we've done it on other rifle pages. That said, the standard long rifles will be toughest as there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between them. The carbines and sniper versions not so difficult to differentiate so perhaps that could be a good place to start. I agree also about a 'variant unknown' section as a kind of buffer. Even then still a lot of work though, as also noted pointed out. Indeed, good luck. StanTheMan (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- I think he means splitting the one page into multiple sections, not multiple pages. Similar to the aforementioned Beretta, the whole family is on one page, but all the different variants are in separate sections on the page. As for my thoughts on the matter, it'd certainly be a good idea, but quite a daunting task - the Mosin was made in the millions, so they're in a whole lot of different movies and the like. It'd definitely be a good idea to make a "variant unknown" section, similar to the Sten and Desert Eagle pages. Also, a little tip: if you click on each photo, you can see where it's used, in order to figure out which variants have appeared where. Best of luck, Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2019 (EST)
Mosin Nagant "Obrez"
due to the lack of concealable firearms and hand gun ammo criminals and rebels cut down their Mosin–Nagant rifles to pistol size for easy concealment. In Russian, such weapons are called "obrez" which means "cut" as rifle ammo (7.62x54R) was eazy to get--Seekerdude (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2019 (EDT)
Page Name.
Yep, it's me again, asking about making name changes. Would anybody object to me moving this page to "Mosin-Nagant rifle series"? It'd line up better with some of the other things on the site (e.g. the Lee-Enfield rifle series, both in notation and in hyphenation). If no objections are voiced, I will proceed. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2019 (EDT) P.S.: And yes, I'll go through and manually fix all the redirects.
- I think (but I'm not sure) that "Mosin Nagant series" would be better, considering that this page contains the Frolov shotgun. But regarding the hyphen, it's a different case from the Lee-Enfield. Can anybody well-informed on the subject clarify whether it's more appropriate to have a hyphen in the Mosin Nagant name or not? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 16:42, 12 August 2019 (EDT)
- I've seen it written both ways, but I think the hyphen is more common than the space - after all, hyphenating implies collaboration, or a combination of ideas (the same naming convention is used in other places, especially science - take, for example, the Brønsted-Lowry acid/base theory), whereas the space sorta makes it sound like one person named Mosin Nagant came up with the thing by himself. And as for the "rifle series" thing, I'd argue that it's not necessarily wrong - the M16 rifle series page also includes submachine guns and LMGs, after all - though if you don't want the word "rifle" in the title, you might be better off just naming the page "Mosin-Nagant". Just my two cents. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2019 (EDT)
- I wouldn't exactly call Mosin-Nagant a collaboration, at least not between S. Mosin an L. Nagant. But still, in Western tradition it's been called like that for more than a century, so I think it should remain hyphenated.--MaranaInfirmux (talk) 06:04, 6 November 2019 (EST)
- I've seen it written both ways, but I think the hyphen is more common than the space - after all, hyphenating implies collaboration, or a combination of ideas (the same naming convention is used in other places, especially science - take, for example, the Brønsted-Lowry acid/base theory), whereas the space sorta makes it sound like one person named Mosin Nagant came up with the thing by himself. And as for the "rifle series" thing, I'd argue that it's not necessarily wrong - the M16 rifle series page also includes submachine guns and LMGs, after all - though if you don't want the word "rifle" in the title, you might be better off just naming the page "Mosin-Nagant". Just my two cents. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2019 (EDT)
Difference between M1891 and M1891/30
I understand, that this is two different models, but it's visually looks extremely similar. May somebody tell me, how differ the M1891 from M1891/30. Pyramid Silent (talk) 13:00, 22 December 2020 (EST)
- The iron sights are the most obvious difference, the rear sights are different and the 1930 has a hooded front post.--AgentGumby (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2020 (EST)
- Yeah, now I had notice, that the front sight of M1930 is differ, thanks! However, the rear sights of 1891 and 1930 is look similar. Of course, some differs exist, but it's also seen between various M1891's configurations (Infantry, Dragoon etc.) So, may somebody tell me, what's differ of rear sight availe to differ M1891 from 1930 (I often make this mis-ID in my pages, confusing M1891 and 1930). Pyramid Silent (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2020 (EST)