So I've recently been bit by the surplus bug again, and I'm trying to wade through the many options that are out there. I figured this might be an interesting topic to discuss here, and so I seek your input as to what you'd choose, and why. I'll point out the obvious and state that the CZ 550 FS is not a surplus rifle, but I've had a few CZ 452's and absolutely loved them, and I adore the mannlicher-style full stock. I have a line on each of these at the moment, so some feedback might help me narrow things down. The rifles are as follows:
1) CZ 550 FS in .30-06. Again, not a surplus rifle, but they're handy, they look absolutely smashing, the Mauser action is bomb-proof, and the .30-06 is a staple in American hunting and rifle shooting. It has open sights (another prime reason the surplus bug has me, I don't have to fork over more money for an optic right away), they have a reputation for accuracy, and did I mention how gorgeous they are? The single set trigger is another added plus.
2) M1903A3 (in .30-06, what else?). What I'm looking at is not a collector's piece with full matching numbers, etc., but rather armorer restorations that look the part and shoot well. As fun as it would be to say I have a completely original M1903, I'm more interested in something that looks good and shoots good without running me a grand or so. All three of these are rifles I plan to use for the rest of my life. The A3 has the peep rear sight, and again, a Mauser action. What's not to like?
3) Lee Enfield No4 MKI/MKII. I'm listing both together because a local guy has a nice MKI at a decent price, but I highly prefer the MKII simply for the fact that the trigger is mounted to the receiver, not the trigger guard. I live in AZ, so warping wood from humidity isn't a concern right now. HOWEVER, as a soon-to-be commercial pilot, I have to be prepared to move where the money is, and that could very likely include a number of very humid locations. So a receiver mounted trigger, as found on the MKII, appeals more but I don't really hear a lot of complaints on the MKI, so perhaps I worry needlessly. Anywho, I had a No4 MKII a few years back and LOVED it, but had to sell it when times got tough. I find them to be gorgeous rifles when in good shape, the rear peep/micrometer sight offers excellent options for quick shots as well as accurate shots at distance. And while .303 surplus is drying up quickly and rising in price, it's fairly comparable to .30-06 when it comes to commercial offerings (both in terms of price and performance). I found the cock on closing feature to be easy to work with also. *If you vote for the No4, please note in your comments which you'd go with and why. Thanks!*
4) Mauser 98K. Again, a tank of an action, well-documented performance and reliability, and a good round overall. I just don't know a ton about the 8mm, and for whatever reason I don't find them to be quite as visually pleasing as the No4 or M1903.
Note that I've omitted a few other well-known options you may be inclined to recommend. Feel free to do so, but:
1) I already own a very good condition K31, so I have the "most accurate 'mil-surp' made" box checked off.
2) Mosin's are still fairly cheap and plentiful, overall. Prices ARE rising, but I there are numerous sources that stock nice 91/30s still. A Finnish M39 would be my first choice, but there are still lots of those available as well.
So, there you have it, a novel stating my thoughts and asking for yours. Lemme have it, and thanks for your input and discussions!
Which (mostly surplus) bolt-action rifle to go with, and why?
شارك عبر الماسنجر
