1943 Izhevsk PU Sniper

[Miller Tyme]

I was just looking at the book "The Mosin Nagant Rifle" 3rd edition by Terence W. Lapin. He says in chapter 4 Note: Scope mounts numbered to the individual rifle are reputed to be Polish rather than Russian. On many post- WWII Polish sniper rifles the scope's serial number was stamped on the left side if the receiver just above the stock; this was not done on soviet rifles.

Now I am really confused. I guess I'll never know for sure.

Like a lot of things in Lapin's book he is incorrect.

[Darryl]

I was just looking at the book "The Mosin Nagant Rifle" 3rd edition by Terence W. Lapin. He says in chapter 4 Note: Scope mounts numbered to the individual rifle are reputed to be Polish rather than Russian. On many post- WWII Polish sniper rifles the scope's serial number was stamped on the left side if the receiver just above the stock; this was not done on soviet rifles.

Now I am really confused. I guess I'll never know for sure.

This is not a Polish PU sniper rifle for sure. I wouldn't put a lot into anything in that book.

The missing scope numbers and/or grind marks is a little hard to swallow, however, anyone notice no "proof marks" on the left side just above the wood line. That is unusual for a "standard" M91/30. They moved the proof marks up on the PU snipers to accommodate the scope number. I don't see any proof marks on the side...do you? Interesting.

pu1.png

.

[Fledge]

I was just looking at the book "The Mosin Nagant Rifle" 3rd edition by Terence W. Lapin. He says in chapter 4 Note: Scope mounts numbered to the individual rifle are reputed to be Polish rather than Russian. On many post- WWII Polish sniper rifles the scope's serial number was stamped on the left side if the receiver just above the stock; this was not done on soviet rifles.

Now I am really confused. I guess I'll never know for sure.

This is not a Polish PU sniper rifle for sure. I wouldn't put a lot into anything in that book.

The missing scope numbers and/or grind marks is a little hard to swallow, however, anyone notice no "proof marks" on the left side just above the wood line. That is unusual for a "standard" M91/30. They moved the proof marks up on the PU snipers to accommodate the scope number. I don't see any proof marks on the side...do you? Interesting.

pu1.png

.

Good to know not to put too much faith in Laplin's book. You learn something new from this forum everyday I did also notice no proof marks anywhere on the left side of the receiver. It seems a bit strange. This one may remain a mystery. Thanks for everyone's time and input.

[Pet_My_Mosin]

I was just looking at the book "The Mosin Nagant Rifle" 3rd edition by Terence W. Lapin. He says in chapter 4 Note: Scope mounts numbered to the individual rifle are reputed to be Polish rather than Russian. On many post- WWII Polish sniper rifles the scope's serial number was stamped on the left side if the receiver just above the stock; this was not done on soviet rifles.

Now I am really confused. I guess I'll never know for sure.

This is not a Polish PU sniper rifle for sure. I wouldn't put a lot into anything in that book.

The missing scope numbers and/or grind marks is a little hard to swallow, however, anyone notice no "proof marks" on the left side just above the wood line. That is unusual for a "standard" M91/30. They moved the proof marks up on the PU snipers to accommodate the scope number. I don't see any proof marks on the side...do you? Interesting.

pu1.png

.

Good to know not to put too much faith in Laplin's book. You learn something new from this forum everyday [emoji106] I did also notice no proof marks anywhere on the left side of the receiver. It seems a bit strange. This one may remain a mystery. Thanks for everyone's time and input.

Kind of rifle that seeing it in person could make a world of difference... Had a rifle that had a repro PEM mount on it but was wrong year to be a PEM and had two sets of mount holes - one PU set and one PEM. There was no scope number on the side of the barrel shank that I could see for a long time. Was talking with a friend about it, wiped it with a vaguely oily rag outside in overcast light and lo and behold in just the right light at just the right angle, you could make out half of a number 4 at the tail end of scope number that had survived. It was a resnipered ex PU converted to PEM.



Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[cyberjad]

Looks similar to some of the recent imports - everything looks legit to me. There were Izhevsk's that came in without the scope number on the barrel shank. It's a very nice gun and has surely been refurbished more than one, as the vast majority were.

The stock appears to likely be a Tula, not an Izhevsk. Tula did not match the scope to the number on the barrel shank, possibly they did the refurbishment and ground the scope number off? We will probably never know for sure, but seeing no scope number is not something unseen on snipers considered legit. As is seeing a scope number or multiple scope numbers lined out or entirely not matching the gun.

Personally, I rather have no scope number, than one crossed out and not matching the scope (very common), as I have to wonder if that rifle was a retired sniper, pieced back together to sell. Additionally, finding an Izhevsk were the scope number still matches the barrel shank is not an easy task.

[Darryl]

Looks similar to some of the recent imports - everything looks legit to me. There were Izhevsk's that came in without the scope number on the barrel shank. It's a very nice gun and has surely been refurbished more than one, as the vast majority were.

Problem is, we know it is not one of the recient imports. We know (by the import marks) it is a very early Century import rifle. Those rifles did not always look like the present imports.

The stock appears to likely be a Tula, not an Izhevsk. Tula did not match the scope to the number on the barrel shank, possibly they did the refurbishment and ground the scope number off? We will probably never know for sure, but seeing no scope number is not something unseen on snipers considered legit. As is seeing a scope number or multiple scope numbers lined out or entirely not matching the gun.

This is not a Tula sniper rifle. The barrel shank is a Izhevsk rifle. All Izhevsk rifles were marked on the barrel shank on the left. They may have removed it (which would show). This is not a Tula sniper.

Personally, I rather have no scope number, than one crossed out and not matching the scope (very common), as I have to wonder if that rifle was a retired sniper, pieced back together to sell. Additionally, finding an Izhevsk were the scope number still matches the barrel shank is not an easy task.

Myself....I'd rather have an x'd out shank or lined out, or mismatched shank as it proves the shank at one time was from a sniper. This rifle is in suspect because it has no "past" evidence of a number. There are tons of mismatched refurb's out there that is completely legit. It's when it is missing like this rifle is, that makes us wonder.

Problem on this rifle is, the "proof marks" are high on the left side. That was done to sniper barrel shanks only. There is no "positive" way of knowing if this sniper is legit but......we know the rest of the parts look legit. so.......?????

[Miller Tyme]

Looks similar to some of the recent imports - everything looks legit to me. There were Izhevsk's that came in without the scope number on the barrel shank. It's a very nice gun and has surely been refurbished more than one, as the vast majority were.

Problem is, we know it is not one of the recient imports. We know (by the import marks) it is a very early Century import rifle. Those rifles did not always look like the present imports.

The stock appears to likely be a Tula, not an Izhevsk. Tula did not match the scope to the number on the barrel shank, possibly they did the refurbishment and ground the scope number off? We will probably never know for sure, but seeing no scope number is not something unseen on snipers considered legit. As is seeing a scope number or multiple scope numbers lined out or entirely not matching the gun.

This is not a Tula sniper rifle. The barrel shank is a Izhevsk rifle. All Izhevsk rifles were marked on the barrel shank on the left. They may have removed it (which would show). This is not a Tula sniper.

Personally, I rather have no scope number, than one crossed out and not matching the scope (very common), as I have to wonder if that rifle was a retired sniper, pieced back together to sell. Additionally, finding an Izhevsk were the scope number still matches the barrel shank is not an easy task.

Myself....I'd rather have an x'd out shank or lined out, or mismatched shank as it proves the shank at one time was from a sniper. This rifle is in suspect because it has no "past" evidence of a number. There are tons of mismatched refurb's out there that is completely legit. It's when it is missing like this rifle is, that makes us wonder.

Problem on this rifle is, the "proof marks" are high on the left side. That was done to sniper barrel shanks only. There is no "positive" way of knowing if this sniper is legit but......we know the rest of the parts look legit. so.......?????

This ^^^^^^^^^^^

The problem you have is from the pics we have seen this rifle leaves us with more questions than answers.

[Darryl]

The problem you have is from the pics we have seen this rifle leaves us with more questions than answers.

I agree. This is one of those snipers you almost have to have in your hands to make a decision.....and maybe not even then could you tell. Perhaps more photos of different angles of the barrel shank on the left side might help, but I suspect it wouldn't.

This has always been my problem with these early Century sniper imports. Because they did make "put together snipers" and made no attempt to hide it, That always casts a shadow of doubt for the "real" refurb'd snipers they did import. I tend to stay away from them,....... but if I found one cheap enough!!!.....


One last observation:
I always watch the "finish" of the receiver (not the barrel shank) on snipers. They were always "finished" to a smoother degree then standard M91/30 rifles (even when the arsenals were "pushed"). This receiver is on the "rough" side for a sniper. This may not mean anything, and not enough to judge the rifle on by itself but,....just interesting.

[Fledge]

The problem you have is from the pics we have seen this rifle leaves us with more questions than answers.

I agree. This is one of those snipers you almost have to have in your hands to make a decision.....and maybe not even then could you tell. Perhaps more photos of different angles of the barrel shank on the left side might help, but I suspect it wouldn't.

This has always been my problem with these early Century sniper imports. Because they did make "put together snipers" and made no attempt to hide it, That always casts a shadow of doubt for the "real" refurb'd snipers they did import. I tend to stay away from them,....... but if I found one cheap enough!!!.....


One last observation:
I always watch the "finish" of the receiver (not the barrel shank) on snipers. They were always "finished" to a smoother degree then standard M91/30 rifles (even when the arsenals were "pushed"). This receiver is on the "rough" side for a sniper. This may not mean anything, and not enough to judge the rifle on by itself but,....just interesting.

I noticed the same thing. I have a standard 91/30 Ishevsk that has a very rough receiver. This one is smooth as a Soviet babies bottom compared to that one It is hard to get good pictures at different angles. I have tried. One of this days I may dig out some calipers and try to see how round the barrel shank is, and if I can detect a slight flat spot. Still weird the proof marks are so high up. If they ground off the scope numbers they did a good job of making it hard to see if they were there.

[Ratnik]

I was just looking at the book "The Mosin Nagant Rifle" 3rd edition by Terence W. Lapin. He says in chapter 4 Note: Scope mounts numbered to the individual rifle are reputed to be Polish rather than Russian. On many post- WWII Polish sniper rifles the scope's serial number was stamped on the left side if the receiver just above the stock; this was not done on soviet rifles.

Now I am really confused. I guess I'll never know for sure.

Izhevsk originally stamped scope serial number at the left side of the barrel, mount was left unmarked
Tula originally stamped rifle serial at the mount, no scope number at the barrel
Your rifle is legit refurbished sniper with scrubbed scope number.
Interesting that scope at your rifle is calibrated to SVT ballistics. During refurbishment all parts were mixed, and yours got distance adjustment turret from 1940-1942 "Progress" factory SVT scope.

[racerguy00]

I'm not up on sniper details, but I do know that Lapin's book has many inaccuracies. I would verify anything in it with other sources.

[Fledge]

I am beginning to think the scope numbers may have been scrubbed off, but it is so subtle. I took a few more pictures of the left side of the receiver. Let me know what you think. It almost looks like they may have gone a bit too high when they were scrubbing the numbers, and may have scrubbed out part of the first cyrillic character that translates to an english D.

[rayjd2]

This looks much like the rifle I got from Royal Tiger. Mine is also a '43 Izhevsk, and isn't finished too well. One of the safety catches near the cocking piece, the left one, is still square. Barrel also has "threads" on the outside, under the hand guard.
But is shoots well, the scope reticle lined up over the centerline without adjustment like it should.

Mine also has the apparently "missing" scope number and invisible grind marks. But they're there.
His marks are there too.
My rifle is a generic 1965 refurb, had the scope # and rifle # SLOPPILY electropenciled on the flat of scope mount on the outward side. Original # found near the wood line was ground off, then action and barrel reblued. Hides the grind very well, there's a slight dimple remaining, nothing more. Must've been ground "with the grain" so to speak.

So here's my embryonic theory. Rifles without a scope # AND with grind marks probably had a busted scope, and this could be just a different refurb pattern. Making work for Ivan.

Of course, I'm also new. Mosin Gods, please review.

[Darryl]

Sorry, with out this rifle in my hands, I'd have to say "I just don't see the grind marks or the flatting it leave behind".


Here is a very typical look of a ground off barrel shank.




Use photo below:
The spot to look for first is,
1) The ends of the barrel shank. It will show if it has been ground at all (notice left of the first digit (2) of the new scope number).
2) The opposite side where the barrel mates to the receiver. That usually shows because the receiver is a little larger then the barrel and they sometimes "nick" the receiver a bit.
3) Notice the grain of the barrel shank. After the new scope number, you can notice the grain of the metal changes. To the right of the scope number is the original finish grain), under the scope numbers the grain is different (smoother).

grindmarks1.png

The rifle in this post has none of those. You will always see at least one of them. Sometime it's hard to see in a photo, and other times not. This is why I am saying I'd have to have this rifle in my hands to say one way or another. These are very hard things to teach over the internet. Seeing it in your hands makes it become more clear (if you know what you are looking at.

You can't make up a new "theory" for each one that comes out, not unless you have some evidence to back it up (more examples). If someone held a gun to my head and said I had to guess, I'd say it's probably real because of the lack of the proof marks on the side (they are up high like a typical sniper).

I can't say for positive on this rifle, but I'll stick with....????? ..........can't positively say. (unless you want to send it to me to look at).



.

[Fledge]

Sorry, with out this rifle in my hands, I'd have to say "I just don't see the grind marks or the flatting it leave behind".


Here is a very typical look of a ground off barrel shank.




Use photo below:
The spot to look for first is,
1) The ends of the barrel shank. It will show if it has been ground at all (notice left of the first digit (2) of the new scope number).
2) The opposite side where the barrel mates to the receiver. That usually shows because the receiver is a little larger then the barrel and they sometimes "nick" the receiver a bit.
3) Notice the grain of the barrel shank. After the new scope number, you can notice the grain of the metal changes. To the right of the scope number is the original finish grain), under the scope numbers the grain is different (smoother).

grindmarks1.png

The rifle in this post has none of those. You will always see at least one of them. Sometime it's hard to see in a photo, and other times not. This is why I am saying I'd have to have this rifle in my hands to say one way or another. These are very hard things to teach over the internet. Seeing it in your hands makes it become more clear (if you know what you are looking at.

You can't make up a new "theory" for each one that comes out, not unless you have some evidence to back it up (more examples). If someone held a gun to my head and said I had to guess, I'd say it's probably real because of the lack of the proof marks on the side (they are up high like a typical sniper).

I can't say for positive on this rifle, but I'll stick with....????? ..........can't positively say. (unless you want to send it to me to look at).



.

Yeah some of the details are not as clear in the pictures. I understand. I tried taking a picture of where the barrel shank meets the receiver to show that it does have a slight flat spot, but not as noticable as the one in your photo. I couldn't get the picture to come out good enough. I feel pretty good that it is legit. I wasn't planning on selling it, and I didn't pay anything for it in the first place. Thanks for the feedback.

[Darryl]

Sometimes they just do a really good job of it!!

Maybe it was a "No Vodka Day!"

[R19419130]

I have one very similar to this, but mine is a Izhevsk 1941 PU Sniper with the PU sniper number engraved into the receiver. The mosin has all matching numbers so I am led to believe this is also a legit rifle. Only thing that confuses me is didn't they weld the scope holes in the receiver when taken back to a oem rifle? Cause mine doesn't have that but all my numbers match and the engraving is really old.

[desdem12]

I have one very similar to this, but mine is a Izhevsk 1941 PU Sniper with the PU sniper number engraved into the receiver

I don't believe there are any 41pus but it could be a 41 pem. Some of the pus didn't get returned to oem and had their scopes and mounts taken.

[Miller Tyme]

I have one very similar to this, but mine is a Izhevsk 1941 PU Sniper with the PU sniper number engraved into the receiver

I don't believe there are any 41pus but it could be a 41 pem. Some of the pus didn't get returned to oem and had their scopes and mounts taken.

They didn't stamp the numbers on the barrel shanks on any snipers other than the PU. The 41 in question sounds like a reproduction especially since the scope numbers are engraved ( reading as EP'ed) on the receiver.

[R19419130]

Update: Found out there was comsmoline covering part of the lettering with dirt trapped in it (go figure it would cover it to make it look like a U) looks like its not a PU number but instead says PH with the nunbers what looks to be 4790 which I cannot find any information about. I know its not the import number as that was engraved into the barrel near the front sight. That and the number engraved is pretty old, matches the same engraving on the receiver from the factory. I have not seen any other mosins marked with this number so I have spent countless hours and lost plenty of sleep including tonight just trying to find what that number is. I do also have slight grinding to the barrel shank so thats what also led me to believe it had a scope. There are other brandings on this rifle that I have also not seen on any other mosin including what looks to be a box with a tent inside the box (hard to see cause the branding is so old). I have looked on the branding identifiers and haven't come up with anything. I will post up the rifle sometime later today in the general thread area.