>$1,500 buy now price>current bid of $805>for a fucking Nagant revolverwhat the fuck
Thanks Obama.
No one wants to make a modern production Nagant even though we are in the age of cheap and available suppressors and it makes more sense than ever to have one. It's basically proof that the Demiurge does, in fact, control the material realm, and nothing can possibly be truly good or make sense in this life.
>>65179420>tfw i traded a chopped up ratty mk3 enfield for a perfect condition 1895, with holster, cleaning rod, and original ammo (that still fired)i regret none of it, i legit really like the revolver because of the way the cylinder locksi don't even care about the obturating cartridges, just the way it keeps time
>>65179420My friend has one of these and it has the worst trigger pull I’ve ever felt in my life. Like comically bad double action pull, it feels like something’s wrong with the gun. I still wish I bought one when they were $99 though.
>>65179444Because these things suck ass.The russian gas-seal nagants are fucking awful compared to any and all other nagant revolvers.Even the Soviets indirectly admitted this when they abandoned the design and made brand new gas seal revolvers (Toz-36 and Toz-49) that were completely unrelated to these pieces of shit.
>>65179469Yes but my point still stands.
>>65179460I have no idea why they insisted on making this revolver double action. Somebody had to realize the double action trigger sucks so hard that it's better to treat it as a single action only revolver.
>>65179444>it makes more sense than ever to have oneFor what purpose? A suppressed Nagant is much too large for CCW, and there are far better guns for sneaky shit.
>>65179460>I still wish I bought one when they were $99 though.I did. it wasn't worth it.
>>65179751I bought a basically new 1940 Tula with holster and accessories for ~$50.00, back when they were common.Easily the worst firearm I have ever owned.The ammo available then was so bad, it was not uncommon to have the bullets bounce off the 4X4 target post.The D/A trigger pull was not just awful, it was inconsistent from shot to shot. Lastly it was out of time and would frequently lock up if not fired single-action.This was in an example that was basically brand new and unfired since the day it was made.
>>65179469No shit a 19th century service pistol has nothing to do with sporting competition target revolvers produced almost a century later.
>>65179853There were better and smoother revolvers made that were contemporary with the Nagant though.
>>65179853Other versions of the Nagant revolvers were actually pretty good. They were well made and utilized a simple and well designed lockwork with a pretty smooth trigger.Yeah, the ejector rod design was always slow and worse than its competitors, but they weren't bad guns.The russian Nagants were however absolutely bad guns.
>>65179905Many times Pop told me of fucking around with a Nagant shortly before Germ-enemy went tits up.Once he shot all it's ammo he just took 30 Carbine and smashed it shorter in a vise. Said it kicked like hell but would shoot clean across the valley. This inspired me to buy a Ruger Blackhawk in .30 Carbine age 25. I got Dad to go shoot it with me and he said it was a sweet flat shooting pistol - But it wasn't a "patch on the ass" of his old hard-kicking Nagant.
>>65179444You don't need a gas-seal to suppress a revolver.
>>65179624Russian small arms designers knew, that their guns would end up in the hands of illiterate mongoloids, so they've deliberately made them as idiot proof as possible, the DA trigger pull was purposefully made heavy as fuck to minimize the chance of a negligent discharge. There was also a SAO version made for regular enlisted troops, the idea was that retards would waste precious ammo by magdumping all 7 rounds at once in DA at the first sight of danger, so they were issued single action only models to conserve ammo.
>>65179420I’ve got a Nagant just like that, how much do you guys think I could sell it for?
>>65182390Why are you asking us? Go on Gunbroker, do a search for completed listings, see what people are actually paying for them.
>>65179444Because the design is bad retard. You would have to set up a bunch of custom reloading lines, you would need to deal with harder brass recycling. You can literally just change the cylinder design to get a gas seal that's good enough
>>65182390sold mine for 450 a few years ago
>>65179420LOL, the thumbnail made me think it was a revolver with a fucking foregrip.
>>65179420I KNOW WHAT I GOTNO LOWBALLS>>65179444Have you use one of these? They are a fucking dogshit revolver, the reload sucks as much as the trigger does, and if you don't cruise around spaces online for scam prices, they aren't that difficult to find for more reasonable pricing.>>65179455I can't say I fully hate them (they're more bearable in single-action), and they have their history, but nobody in their right mind willingly made a handgun like this ever again.
>>65179460Yeah, it's fucking amazing, just unbelievably bad.>>65179825>>65179825>The D/A trigger pull was not just awful, it was inconsistent from shot to shot.>Lastly it was out of time and would frequently lock up if not fired single-action.This however sounds like something was actually wrong with the gun in question, like some idiot had fucked it up when it got rearsenaled or something.
>>65179420It really baffles me because handnuggets aren't that rare, and among classic revolvers they stand out as being exceptionally terrible. You can suppress one, but that doesn't compensate for all the horrible attributes of that design.Meanwhile you can get a classic Colt or S&W that might tell an equally interesting story for $400-600 any day of the week and shoot ammunition that is readily available.
>>65179420Would see why you would want one. I think they are cool.
