Talk:Mosin–Nagant

message: Is it worth transferring (and translating) this chapter from the article in the Russian Wikipedia?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.83.108.78 (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy of combat and effectiveness of fire (Кучность боя и эффективность огня)

message: Something needs to be said about the design of the rifle. Especially the peculiar and idiosyncratic feeding mechanism.Veritas Panther 14:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It feeds from a single stack magazine which is loaded using stripper clips, not so unusual. Or am I misunderstanding your question?Bigyaks (talk) 01:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The usual single stack or double stack magazine loaded via stripper clips has the column of cartridges bearing against the bottom of the bolt under pressure of the magazine spring; drag on the bolt by magazine spring pressure changes as cartridges are fed from the magazine from first to last. The Nagant system is "peculiar and idiosyncratic" in that the top cartridge in the magazine is never under magazine spring pressure and the magazine spring exerts no drag on bolt operation; any cartridges below the top cartridge are under magazine spring pressure, but are held down by the "interruptor-ejector" (aka "distributor ejector" or "cartridge valve-ejector"). WHB Smith "Small Arms of the World" 1966 observed "No other [bolt-action] rifle needs or uses this device." The interruptor releases one cartridge at a time to lie loosely in the feedway as the bolt is operated; this allows consistent feed pressure from first to last shot. The Nagant system appears unique among commonly accepted bolt action rifle designs. (Most tube fed lever and pump action rifles and shotguns also use a magazine interruptor (aka "shell stop") so that the cartridge on the cartridge lifter/carrier is not under magazine spring pressure during the feed cycle. Mosin-Nagant is the only widely distributed bolt action rifle to use this feature.) -- Naaman Brown (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Design

message: Today's edit by 212.159.98.189 comes from an address with many vandalism warnings, although different users may share the same address. The rifle caliber of .33 mm is to tiny to fit the ammunition, although he may have meant .33 inches which is 8.382 mm. Art LaPella 19:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. ROG5728 (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible vandalism 

message: "This rifle was designed to be fired with the bayonet extended, which increased accuracy due to harmonic vibrations created when a round is fired" Never heard of this happening before. I know standard infantry rifles were sighted for firing with bayonet extended, but I'm in doubt about increased accuracy due to it. Anyone have a good source for this claim? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zytsef (talk • contribs) 21:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Weights intended to dampen harmonic vibrations to improve accuracy in terms of bullet group size are usually more solidly attached than a Mosin rifle bayonet. I shoot a 91/30 and a Type 53 Mosin just fine w/o bayonet and have them zeroed w/o bayonet (the sights are adjustable, folks); a fellow vintage military shooter shoots his M1944 Mosin with bayonet extended since that was the way it was when the arsenal zeroed the sights and he doesn't want to rezero for bayonet folded. I accept that 91/30 with bayonet attached/unttached or M1944 with bayonet folded/unfolded may have a different POI Point Of Impact; I have not seem significant changes in group size which is the purpose of tuning harmonic vibration of a barrel. Most folks intending to tune harmonic vibration of the 91/30 barrel to reduce group size use cork gasket material around the barrel at the points where the barrel bands bind the stock and handguard together; they don't add weights to the muzzle. Of course, this may be dismissed as Original Research, small sample size and will be trumped by a published source (but I have found a lot of published gun writing has the authority of a barbershop war-story, that is, caveat lector). -- Naaman Brown (talk) 14:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: Where did this 1895 date come from? did they decide to not use the first for years worth of receivers for some reason?  I know it to be false because i have a 1891 tikka on tula right here. indy_muaddib (talk) 18:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Find a reference and make the changes.  It's not what you know, it's what you can provide a reference for. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 18:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 1891/1895

message: not sure about "arshins"
arshin is the plural
arshini is the singular  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.213.140 (talk) 04:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Arshini is plural. — Robert Greer (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  arshin 

message: I added a subheading for Nagant's legal dispute since it seemed like a distinct topic under the history heading. This section seems like it needs a lot of work, though. Citations, style editing, etc.
Trevorzink (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refinement and production section 

message: There has been some dispute regarding effective range of the Mosin-Nagant, I myself have seen a professional military sniper shooting accurately until targets started being beyond 800m, the rifle in question was Tkiv-85, a modern sniper rifle using original receivers from Mosin-Nagants, as most, if not all, Mosin-Nagant variants were designed to be used by military, my opinion is that effective range is the distance from which a skilled sniper can hit a human-size target without issues, there are many cases where kills have been made from 2000m+ with rifle that according to manufacturer has effective range of 1500m and even the snipers who can pull this off say that the effective range is 1500m. Ape89 (talk) 10:45, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effective range 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Konigsberg snipers.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: This section is in need of citations and sourcing. There are no references in this section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.88.233 (talk) 09:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nagant's Legal Dispute 

message: I replaced all the hex references in the article, save the explanatory one. I know it's a common term, but it is technically wrong. If anyone has any strong feelings to the contrary, change it back. I just thought as an encyclopedia article, the correct terminology should be used. Mongoosander (talk) 21:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:COMMONNAME can be used to argue validity, one way or the other. Personally, it might be more informative to the reader to specify that while there are receivers that are commonly known as hex receivers, the receivers are actually octogonal. It might even be nice to find out why they are referred to as hex versus octogonal and provide that information to the reader. Aneah|talk to me 19:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

text: I have a "hex" receiver Mosin rifle 91/30 the receiver dated 1926. The front of the receiver does appear from the top to be octagonal with five flat sides visible; however, when you take the gun out of the stock, there are not three bottom flats to the receiver to make eight sides: the bottom of the receiver is rounded. So that makes "six" sides: five flats and a curve, not a true hexagon but six sided and not an octagon. --Naaman Brown (talk) 16:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  hex-o-matic 

message: The whole section on the history, design, and the legal battles with Nagant needs cleanup. It's hard to understand and follow, and doesn't seem to follow any kind of cohesive structure. I would attempt this myself, but I'm not even sure I understand what it's saying. I'd be afraid to fix it and end up presenting it wrong. For example, they should explain why it's called the Moisin-Nagant and not the Moisin FIRST, instead of leaving you wondering "WTF?" for several paragraphs. More explanation of what parts Nagant contributed would be nice; I'd always read that it was called "Moisin-Nagant" for similar reasons to the "Lee-Enfield", (I assume that many people will be approaching the article with the same misapprehensions, as it is commonly stated in various literature); it makes it even more difficult to follow the article, and it was only with a certain amount of difficulty that I decided it's saying that it's really a "Moisin" rifle, and they just tagged on "Nagant" for political reasons. Saying that first off would have been helpful. More detail about these "interupters" would be helpful as well, so the reader doesn't have to take the articles word that they were "un-necessary" pieces. Sounds pretty important, if they keep the rifle functioning properly. Also makes me wonder, is this viewpoint biased, or do other people still argue that Nagants name deserves to belong on the rifle? Because it sounds like they are strenuously insisting that it doesn't, which makes one suspect that others disagree..45Colt 12:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section on history and design, legal battles needs cleanup. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mosin–Nagant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402163136/http://www.russian-mosin-nagant.com/russian.html to http://www.russian-mosin-nagant.com/russian.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'd assumed it was someone's honest mistake, but notice that there is a mention of another possible vandalsim involving ridiculous numbers for bullet diameters. The section on the Finnish rifles says that:
   "Handloaded cartridges for Finnish rifles should however use a 2.8 millimetres (0.11 in) bullet for use with other Finnish Mosin–Nagant variants instead of the 2.9 millimetres (0.11 in) one which gives best results in M39, Soviet and most of other Mosin–Nagant rifles."
Obviously a rifle that fires 7.62mm/.30cal does not take 2.8mm/.11in bullets. I could see making a single mistake entering information, but two in a row? And it's two large to mean differences in bullet sizes; bullet size differences are in thousands of an inch, fractions of a millimeter. Neither .28mm nor 28mm makes any sense no matter how you look at it. I think I will just remove the offending passage until this can be resolved. AnnaGoFast (talk) 02:02, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  More vandalism?  

message: Hey, added some info about after market modifications to the page (beyond that of scout scope modifications) along with the accompanying links.  Any thoughts on those?  This is my first legit edit and I want to make sure it's quality work.  I also plan on talking in length about the Archangel stock and it's removable magazine capability. XxTheEndxx (talk) 12:46, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modifications 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mosin–Nagant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130915124207/http://zonawar.ru/rash_guns/rg_vintovki_OTs-48_eng.html to http://zonawar.ru/rash_guns/rg_vintovki_OTs-48_eng.html
*Added  tag to http://www.russian-mosin-nagant.com/global.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130624131144/http://www.molot.biz/product/ko91-30.php to http://molot.biz/product/ko91-30.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* M44 Mosin.JPG
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* M1907 Carbine.JPG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* M1907 Carbine.JPG
* M44 Mosin.JPG
* 
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Mosin–Nagant's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Capie":
From Bren light machine gun: 
From Nagant M1895: 
From Lee–Enfield: 
Reference named "Walter":
From Steyr Model 1912 Mauser: 
From Nagant M1895: Walter, John: Rifles of the World (3rd ed.), page 123. Krause Publications, 2006.
Reference named "Smith":
From Azerbaijan: 
From Vz. 24: Smith, p. 295
From Chiang Kai-shek rifle: 
From Kingdom of Italy: Smith (1997), p. 284.
From Nagant M1895: 
From Steyr Model 1912 Mauser: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:52, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Mosin–Nagant]] 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Mosin–Nagant's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "auto":
From People's Liberation Army: 
From Russia: 
From YouTube: Todd Spangler, YouTube Terminates Toy Freaks Channel Amid Broader Crackdown on Disturbing Kids’ Content, Variety, November 17, 2017
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Mosin–Nagant]] 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Mosin–Nagant's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "TG":
From Thompson submachine gun: 
From Venezuela: 
Reference named "WG":
From QBU-88: 
From Nagant M1895: 
From Vektor CR-21: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:22, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Mosin–Nagant]] 

message: Can somebody please change it. It is confusing, people.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corrector2021 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lee-Enfield Bolt, Does not turn thru 60 degrees but 90, like every other modern bolt rifle. 

message: Should the standard this field be the expected rate of the military issuing the firearm or removed entirely?
I've noticed on some wiki pages like the M1903 Springfield, it notes that the rate of fire "User dependent; usually 15 to 30 rounds per minute", Where as the Lee Enfield has a rate of 	"20–30 aimed shots per minute". The same story with the Ross Rifle "User Dependent". 
The Karabiner 98k neglects the Rate of fire field. 
Unless cited should all these Rate of Fire fields be removed? or altered to User Dependent?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolframuranium (talk • contribs) 17:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, such a thing as "battle fire rate" isn't equal actual fire rate of X rpm; so the field should be blank. 81.89.66.133 (talk) 14:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk: Rate of Fire, wider issue with bolt action rifles 

message: As mentioned in the article, the colloquial name “Mosin-Nagant” used in the West is persistent but erroneous, as established in Nagant's legal dispute.
Or, to put it simply, monseur Nagant accused Mosin of copying just to get the 100'000 ruble prize. And since Mosin's work was a "secret" military-grade invention, they had to pay Nagant to not worsen the future relations. That's... a rather wonky reason to keep saying Mosin is "mais non, mais non, c'est Mosin-Nagant!" ? 81.89.66.133 (talk) 12:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we probably rename it for good measure? 

message: That's why nobody takes Wikipedia seriously anymore. Should we add to the article about shovels that they were issued to the Russian soldiers too? 5.147.48.134 (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mosin-Nagant rifled issued to Russian conscripts?