Long Way to Tipperary EditionDiscuss any old stuffs.Thread question: What's your "Fuck you, I like it" surp?Recent News:- CMP has >100,000 M14s, they will be <$2k and have a 2 rifles per year buying limit (fuck boomers)- CMP also got 5,000 of the Army's surplus shotguns- CETME L kits coming in, now with early handguardsPrevious Thread: >>65396114
>>65443256First for FTR again
>>65443256>What's your "Fuck you, I like it" surp?Shooting 7.62x54R out of my RTI B-Grade M.95.
>>65443256What's your "Fuck you, I like it" surp?My 91/24. Works well with good clips and is as accurate as any run of the mill Mauser, Enfield, or Mannlicher. Recoil is soft, too.
>>65443256>What's your "Fuck you, I like it" surp?honestly i have a mild resentment for every gun (including non surp) i own i cant bring myself to like a gun 100%somethings always off, mis/force matched numbers, incorrect wood, refinished, minor pitting, etc. what mental illness is this
>>65443488What a cutiepie
>>65443493Perfectionism. Spend more time with them. Shoot with them. Sleep with them.
I am once again sharing my love for the Savage 99 in the only good thread on this board.
>>65443256I am really proud to announcethis is the 4th time someone stole my picand used it to start a thread
I see Lee Enfield, I post Lee Enfield. Always loved them. To thread topic, I have this one, my grandfather bought it for me in a pawn shop when I was real young. No import marks on it, excellent condition. Despite the naysayers saying i should convert a different one, I converted it to a T replica. I don't plan to ever in my life sell it, and I like the aesthetics of the T, so fuck you, I like it.
>>65444133You get a pass only because of your homebrew WA2000
>>65444128Your themed pics are useful with coming up with thread themes. Not sorry.
>>65443702I held one for the first time a few months ago and now I really want one
>>65443702i have one in .308
I only have 1 surplus rifle, and I’m lucky to have gotten the parts kit that I did in excellent condition and made by a builder who knows his shit.
Shamelessly posting my Savage 99 with a Lee Enfield so I can keep this milsurp related.
Thoughts on sporterized rifles? The prices are attractive and I would like a historical rifle I won't feel bad for scratching up.
Is the Springfield 1903 rear ladder peep sight near impossible get a good sight picture? My dad was having issues seeing a large orange target through his, worried it might be the early signs of degenerative eye disease, I try and it's nothing like my 1917's or M1's rear peep. It's fucking tiny, the target is dimmed because I'm assuming because the peep is so small little light gets through, and trying to line up a sight picture with the blade and the hood was an exercise in tedium. I was getting better groups with the battlesight. Is this normal? Also I learned first hand that the M1917 has a better combat sight by a wide margin than the M1903.
>>65445450I don't care much for them, but that's because I'm a Eurofag and would rather put the loicense fees and paperwork towards something that's in historically appropriate conditionIf I hunted I might of course consider something like pic rel. It's bubbafucked but rather tastefully bubbafucked
>>65443256>>65444133I remember different Lee Enfield models used shotgun ammo, as well as classic musketroon.
>>65445450If they’re a decent-looking conversion and cheaper than a modern bambi blaster then go for it.>>65445467How good are your eyes? What size aperture do you have? 5 was standard, but 4-thru-10 (“10” being 0.1” diameter) were available from the armorer’s kit and were intended to be fitted to suit the eye of the soldier. The sight hood was meant to be removed before shooting, though with the M1905 “sight cover” you can leave it on. The 547yd zero for the fixed “battle” sight is absurd. Reading in some of the period literature and they talk about such significant hold-unders at 100-300 yards that in the time it would take you to work that out you could have flipped up the ladder and set the elevation.
>>65445765My eyes are fine I guess, was making reliable hits on a 2/3 sillouette at 200 yards easy with my M1 and M1917, and my dad had no issues with his M1 either. The rifle is at my dad's so it's not handy right now. Is there a marking on the rear peep that will say what the size is? I know he doesn't have a micrometer to measure. Might have to buy a repro rear sight peep and open it up for him.
>>65445584Indian Police used shotgun Enfields, probably still do.
>>65445818The sight aperture plate will be numbered on the back. You might get a reproduction USMC “No.10” sight set: the front sight blade is twice as wide as standard and taller, bringing the battle sight zero down to 200 yards. The rear has only the single 0.1” aperture; no “Christmas tree”.
>>65445840
>>65445840>>65445867Thanks for the info, his sights is definitely the Army configuration (rear sight has the christmas tree and small front sight hood), which I guess is ironic since he bought it from an old Marine.
>>65445837Look gorgeous alongside those diesel motorcycle.
>>65445906The Marines went back to the standard sighting system in 1936. USMCweaponry.com is a great resource for Marine stuff.
>>65445450Not only offensive in a historically preservative sense. They also tend to be poorly done by poor people. The ones that are done with any ounce of craftsmanship, skill, or taste are rare.
>>65446192most pre ww2 sporters were almost always done quite well. up until say 1950you post an unrealistic example if some guy bought a cheap krag in the 1920s or 30s and had a gunsmith sporterize it, that becomes a part of its history. krags weren't historical at the time. they were simply "the previous service rifle"To me, WELL done sporters are just as desirable as factory original rifles. the vehement anti-sporterism just feels like zoomers who got into guns post 2020 and dont have a good sense of historical context. its like machining a police surplus glock for a red dot now.
>>65446192>>65446368nah i would salvage the usable parts and throw the rest in the garbage
>>65446411you'd be destroying MORE history that way>life spent as a military krag (likely saw no conflict): 1900-1925 (25 years)>life spent as a beloved hunting rifle passed down through generations: 1925-2026 (101 years)why does only the former count as "history"?
>>65446368Honestly I agree. I've been thinking about sporterizing the mosin I got for free to make a cool retro durr gun, and to piss the autist purists off. Inspired by picrel.
>>65446440>buy a random mosin barrel off ebay to rebarrel my t53 circa 2019>its a Tikka m28. Nope I won't cut that down. >milsurp prices skyrocket. Decide not to molest anything> keep an eye out for a reciver for the m28 barrel>a year ago win a barreled reciver at fuddbroker cheap from an estate > it's a 1934 hex tula, no sights, cut to 21" with a target crown, great bore. Better than the tikka.>have no idea what to do with them.
Are the Zastava .32 ACP pistols fun? I've been thinking either getting one of these or a P83 Wanad for a little more money. I'm not really concerned about practicality besides maybe ammo availability but I wouldn't mind something my gf could use if she has to.
>>65446478turn down the sporter barrel into a sleeve and bore out the T53 barrel, and sleeve it. then you get to keep all your lovely chinese proof marks. you do have a lathe right
>>65446489That's the most logical choice. I feel kinda weird about Johnny cashing an m28 together, with no import markings, then when I die having it float about some LGS like it's worth something.Also I'm buying a dead air wolverine and having a guilt free suppressed mosin since the tula has already been fucked would be fun.I really just need another receiver
Opinions on the Chilean 1912 Steyr? I have the opportunity to buy one in good condition.
>>65446499Or do i turn barrel down for a front sight and turn the tula into an m38 since 21" is close enough?
>>65446479I'm assuming if you're looking for a wanad you've already picked up the dirt cheap p-64s and cz82s that are around right now? My p64 is so nice.
