Mosin M44 vs. Glenfield Marlin 30-30

[Sure Shot Mc Gee]

Practical: Glenfield.

All milsurp: If you desire.

What the majority of sportsmen & woman prefer to use? Certainly isn't the latter. (above)

[emcon5]

What the majority of sportsmen & woman prefer to use? Certainly isn't the latter. (above)

True, but is he a "sportsman"? From the first post, "mostly used as a range gun for plinking and maybe, hunting in the future."

For turning money into noise, the Mosin wins. For hunting, I would choose neither. An entry level bolt gun from any of the big players, would be better in my opinion.

[Cheapshooter]

For hunting, I would choose neither. An entry level bolt gun from any of the big players, would be better in my opinion.

But certainly not in the opinion of millions of deer, and black bear hunters for more than a century.

[44 AMP]

Unless I'm mistaken, the ammo cost for a Mosin Nagant is less than 30-30.

Once, that was true. No more.

That $80 440-rnd spam can is now $219 IF you can find any, and it was only "blaster grade" ammo to begin with.

Hunting ammo? $16.99 for Winchester .30-30 soft points. $26.99 for Winchester 7.62x54R soft points. (and out of stock, limited production)

Just a quick check of Midway's site, 10 choices for 7.62x54 most out of stock.
32 choices for .30-30, with only a couple out of stock.

The days of dirt cheap milsurp available nearly everywhere are OVER. and, for a while, now.

The Mosin can be very accurate, and in the Finish/Rush winter war of 1939, one of the most famous snipers in the world, who fought for the Finn's, racked up over 600 kills in about 6 months, with a good many taken at up to 600yds with a Mosin.

And a good many of his kills were taken with a Submachine gun. It was the man, not the tools he used.

So that Mosin served in some of the most severe winter weather conditions, every encountered in combat and obviously worked. The Marlin Glenfield would not have held up under those conditions, I don't think.

Be not so certain, there are more than a few Winchester & Marlin living in the arctic regions and doing well enough their users keep them. OF course, we're not talking combat conditions. Not quite fair to compare a rifle designed for COMBAT against one designed for sport hunting. Very much Apples vs. Oranges.

[emcon5]

But certainly not in the opinion of millions of deer, and black bear hunters for more than a century.

I didn't say it wasn't adequate, just that there are better options available, especially if the OP lives somewhere out west.

Once, that was true. No more.

That $80 440-rnd spam can is now $219 IF you can find any, and it was only "blaster grade" ammo to begin with.

Hunting ammo? $16.99 for Winchester .30-30 soft points. $26.99 for Winchester 7.62x54R soft points. (and out of stock, limited production)

Just a quick check of Midway's site, 10 choices for 7.62x54 most out of stock.
32 choices for .30-30, with only a couple out of stock.

The days of dirt cheap milsurp available nearly everywhere are OVER. and, for a while, now.

While not as cheap as it once was, blasting ammo is still cheaper. Look at SGammo, the cheapest in stock .30-30 they sell is 50¢/round, although most options are over 60¢. For 7.65x54R, they do have some surplus for 35-39¢ per round, and a few options of new production for under 50¢, with hunting ammo between 50-60¢/per round.

[Blue Duck]

And a good many of his kills were taken with a Submachine gun. It was the man, not the tools he used.

True, a lot were taken with the Submachine gun, but he still took a lot of them with the Mosin and he had other choices available to him, but chose the Mosin over other milsurps, one in particular was the Sweedish 96 Mauser.

[QUOTE][/QUBe not so certain, there are more than a few Winchester & Marlin living in the arctic regions and doing well enough their users keep them. OF course, we're not talking combat conditions. Not quite fair to compare a rifle designed for COMBAT against one designed for sport hunting. Very much Apples vs. Oranges.OTE]

Of course there are plenty of Winchester's and Marlin's in the artic regions, but like you said, a rifle designed for combat is often more reliable then one designed for sporting use, and probably easier to maintain under those harsh conditions.

[jimbob86]

Hunting ammo? $16.99 for Winchester .30-30 soft points. $26.99 for Winchester 7.62x54R soft points. (and out of stock, limited production)

Prvi makes good x54r hunting ammo, and last time I bought it at Cabela's, it was $17/box ..... and it's better than Winchester's x54r, too.

[HistoryJunky]

There are always the soft points made by Wolf in x54R too. IDK how good they are but about 50 cents a shot.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[jrothWA]

Consider the need for ammo [after the cheap stuff gets used up) and repair parts, against the Marlin & 30/30.
The choice is yours.

[Nanuk]

Be not so certain, there are more than a few Winchester & Marlin living in the arctic regions and doing well enough their users keep them. OF course, we're not talking combat conditions. Not quite fair to compare a rifle designed for COMBAT against one designed for sport hunting. Very much Apples vs. Oranges.

What was the gun that won the west? Oh yea, the lever gun. It WAS designed for combat.

[Nanuk]

Oh yea, and the Russians were using Winchester rifles for combat in the 1800's.

[SIGSHR]

Strictly speaking the M44 M-N was designed for rear echelon troops to give them something short and handy they could get into action quickly.

[YankeeIronSights]

Hi folks. Thanks for all the feedback. I bought the Glenfield and could not be happier with the choice. I love the rifle and will share the range review in upcoming days. Thanks again for your suggestions and comments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PatientWolf]

Although I didn’t weigh in sooner, I think you made the right choice and expect you’ll have years of enjoyment from that Glenfield (Glendale?).

[44 AMP]

Not quite fair to compare a rifle designed for COMBAT against one designed for sport hunting. Very much Apples vs. Oranges.

What was the gun that won the west? Oh yea, the lever gun. It WAS designed for combat.

While there have been lever guns used by some nations (Russia and Turkey used some Winchesters) and SOME lever guns were designed with the intent of selling them to the military (though the US never bought any significant quantity), the Marlin was not designed as a combat arm.

After Marlin's submission of a lever action .45-70 was rejected by the Army, Marlin turned their focus to civilian sporting arms, and all their subsequent lever guns, to this day, (including the Glenfield under discussion here) were designed as hunting rifles, not military combat arms.

Winchester made versions of their lever guns intended for military use, but our military was never interested, with one exception. During WW I, the Army purchased a number of Winchester lever guns, and used them to guard PNW fir forests against "communist sabotage".

Prior to WW I, from the 1870s on the lever gun was inferior to military single shots and bolt actions in all ways except firepower. They were complicated, EXPENSIVE, and fragile, compared to service rifles. Plus very few designs fired the military caliber, and about none (with certain Winchester variants being the rare exception) were made to use a bayonet.

The two piece stock of the typical lever gun was a serious drawback to being a combat weapon, because, though few people think of it today, in those days the soldier's rifle was meant to be used in hand to hand combat. And survive being used that way.

Also, military brass did not put a high priority on individual soldiers firepower until after the WW I lessons sank in, and even then most of the major WWII combatants still fielded a 5 shot bolt action as their standard infantry rifle.

the lever gun may have "won the west" but it didn't do in the hands of the US Army.

[Cheapshooter]

What was the gun that won the west? Oh yea, the lever gun. It WAS designed for combat.

While there have been lever guns used by some nations (Russia and Turkey used some Winchesters) and SOME lever guns were designed with the intent of selling them to the military (though the US never bought any significant quantity), the Marlin was not designed as a combat arm.

Thinking the "combat" in winning the West was not primarily military!

[JJ45]

[QUOTE=Blue Duck;6764401]True, a lot were taken with the Submachine gun, but he still took a lot of them with the Mosin and he had other choices available to him, but chose the Mosin over other milsurps, one in particular was the Sweedish 96 Mauser.

[/QUBe not so certain, there are more than a few Winchester & Marlin living in the arctic regions and doing well enough their users keep them. OF course, we're not talking combat conditions. Not quite fair to compare a rifle designed for COMBAT against one designed for sport hunting. Very much Apples vs. Oranges.OTE]

Of course there are plenty of Winchester's and Marlin's in the artic regions, but like you said, a rifle designed for combat is often more reliable then one designed for sporting use, and probably easier to maintain under those harsh conditions.

That would be Simo Haya and he did it all with IRON SIGHTS whether rifle or Suomi KP31 machine pistol!!....! His favored rifle was his issue Finnish Civil Guard Sako built Model 28/30. This rifle was built on a Mosin Nagant hex receiver and was an early 28/30...it differed from the 91 and 91/30s as the Finns modified sights, stock and better trigger. It was affectionatly known as the Pystykorva or literally "Spitz" as the front sights protective "ears" resembled that of the dog.

Comparing the M44 with the Marlin (Glenfield) is apples to oranges. Both excel at what the were intended for and the intended purpose of each is quite different, without getting into it.

Also, the Finn MN rifles, besides the improvements mentioned, were also re-barrelled by Sako, Tikka, Valmet, etc. The only thing common between Finn MNs and the Russians would be the receiver. So although the original Mns are excellent weapons the Finn versions are usually considered an improvement

[Nanuk]

the lever gun may have "won the west" but it didn't do in the hands of the US Army.

The US Army is all that counts? The Nagant was not used by the US Army either.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...ons-go-to-war/

[Nanuk]

Thinking the "combat" in winning the West was not primarily military!

I hate to tell you but if you are exchanging lead, you are in combat. How much maintenance do you think farmer Joe gave his Winchester?

[emcon5]

The Nagant was not used by the US Army either.

Sure it was.

[Archie]

As with many questions, what are you planning on doing with it?

Unless you are a collector, the Marlin is likely going to fit your goals better than the Mosin.

The Mosin will certainly kill things. But not as pleasant to shoot. Do you own picking and learn from it. I don't mean to sound uncaring, but all of life - including buying guns - is a learning experience and one must deal with all the hidden details others don't know.

[Nanuk]

Emcon, I stand corrected, but not in the context that they were wanted...... Only to save the companies after the contract default. I wonder WHERE they were used?

[JJ45]

As an aside, the last Czar Nicholas II, had a miniature Mosin Nagant specially built for his son Alexei, his would be successor... A scaled down model that his young son could handle, since the Czar was deposed in 1917, it had to be a scaled down M91.

Who knows, if it even still exists or where it might be but hard to imagine the collector price it would fetch today!

[jimbob86]

Also, military brass did not put a high priority on individual soldiers firepower until after the WW I lessons sank in, and even then most of the major WWII combatants still fielded a 5 shot bolt action as their standard infantry rifle.

The speed of Information is much faster now ...... these days have much less patience with moribund convention ...... the lessons of WWI took decades to sink in .... but by 1940 ..... standard Infantry rifles .....

.... Garand (never had enough of em, so they pulled springfield '03's out of mothballs and Gave 'em to Marines, the low men on the funding totem pole .....) : 8 Rounds .... SMLE, the Standard of the Brittish Empire for DECADES by then, at the time? Ten. .... The Italian Carcano, 6 rounds ...... The Red Army had a huge stockpile of mostly hard used M91 rifles and lots of tooling for same, and in the name of efficiency, made the best of what they had .... hence the 91/30 (1930) standard ........ but by 1940 , had adopted the SVT 40 (10 rounds) as the way of the future ..... semi-successfully ..... and then their front wall got kicked in ....... the only major players left to talk about are the French, despite their Hero Petain's emphasis on Firepower, went with their mystic cult of "E'lan" and poured concrete.... and the Japanese, with their similar "Bushido" anachronistic fantasies ...... (Hey, propaganda, warm bodies, and generations of old hardware is cheaper and more politically marketable than R&D, Engineering and Production of a better gun ...... also considering that the folks in charge of those countries (the "EXPERTS") were old guys who, if ever, saw first person combat against 3rd World Indigenous people armed with at best, a commercially purchased Mauser ( which most certainly shocked the hell out of the Brits in South Africa 2 generations before!- and they reacted appropriately, IMO) ..... but more likely, an edged weapon or a black powder muzzle stuffer ........