Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Thought I'd post a couple pics of my First Dragoon. It took me a few years to actually get one. I haven't seen any in my area at all at the stores or shows and I was always outbid on-line.
This is a 1929 made Dragoon by Izhevsk on a recycled 1917 Izhevsk receiver tht still has the Czar's stamp clearly seen on the receiver flat. Mis-match parts all appear to be Izhevsk produced.
The bore is strong with shine and is not counter bored.
Well here are a few pics.......don't know when I'll get a chance to shoot her, the temps have been in the single digits all week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Nice rifle.....good find

I am a little confused about the Dragoon. I can't seem to find the link that describes it. I remember after reading it - I was still confused as to what it was. It is shorter than an M91...right? I have a 1927 Tula m91/30, how do I tell if it's an EX dragoon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
A quick and easy way to tell is to look at the sights. If the sights look like the ones pictured on gunguy98's rifle, then it is quite possibly a Dragoon. If it has the hooded front sights and the flat rear sights then it is more than likely an ex-dragoon. There are several other ways to tell, take a look at the site Acutus linked for more, and better, information.

Nice rifle by the way gunguy98, a Dragoon is on my wanted list. Someday maybe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
OK, Mr.smarty pants (Acutus)....is my Tula 1931 also an Ex dragoon??? Ser # 158XX with east German mark. I wonder what percentage of dragoons are original?

I guess I learned something new about 2 of my Mosin Nagants
My guess is no but I'm not an expert. the 1930-1932 era seems to me to be pretty cluttered up since it was a transitional period. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
The easiest way I know of to tell if your M91/30 is an updated Dragoon is by the sight base. If there is a gap in the rear sight base where it contacts the barrel it's an updated Dragoon. If there isn't a gap then it's a M91/30. See pics below.

Of course with 1929 and earlier rifles this method isn't really needed but with the early 1930's rifles it's the only method I know of for ID. It works 99% of the time except I received a 1931 M91/30 that is a bit different. It has a narrower and less deep of a gap. It's probably an updated Dragoon since there is some gap but I'm not 100% sure on it.

Updated Dragoon


M91/30 with no gap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
My '31 tula does have the GAP....so it must be a converted dragoon. However, my 1927 Tula does not have the gap, but an outline of where the gap would be if the rear sight was mounted in the same place, but it is placed about 1/8" further forward toward the front sight???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
My '31 tula does have the GAP....so it must be a converted dragoon. However, my 1927 Tula does not have the gap, but an outline of where the gap would be if the rear sight was mounted in the same place, but it is placed about 1/8" further forward toward the front sight???
Can you post a pic? The ID method may be less accurate than I was thinking.

Anyone else have any that don't fit the pattern?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
I am horrible at taking pictures of these things...but I try tomorrow

But how about this method. My 2 converted Tula dragoons have 3 mounting pins for the rear sight, My 1936 Spanish civil war Ishy has only 1 mounting pin and is definately not a converted dragoon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
I am horrible at taking pictures of these things...but I try tomorrow

But how about this method. My 2 converted Tula dragoons have 3 mounting pins for the rear sight, My 1936 Spanish civil war Ishy has only 1 mounting pin and is definately not a converted dragoon.
I never have been able to find any consistency with the pins. My M91/30's date from 1923 to 1943 and the pin configuration is all over the place with them.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top