[r0bb6ub9]

I have a beautiful ex-sniper. Would it ruin the collector value to re-sniper it?

 

[Joop]

That depends on who you ask and/or who you're trying to sell it to.

 

[Stalin's Ghost]

I have rescoped a number of them of all models. I am of the opinion that this does not destroy collector value if well done and honestly presented if ever sold, particularly if a correct scope is used. I hunt down and collect period scopes and have matched my PU ex-snipers and my SVT-40 with correct year scopes but have used replica scopes on my topmount and sidemount PEs and PEMS.
Rescoping, particularly topmount and sidemount PEs and PEMS, is a tough job so be sure you have the equipment, skills and patience.
i suggest you do a not-too-rare Izhevsk PU first to see how you like it, using a good replica scope. Accoumounts can supply what you need, plus a bolt bend.

 

[clayshooter2]

It will never be as valuable as a real sniper, but how valuable is a 43 ex PU anyway? I mean it is cool in it's ex form, but as a "re-snipered" ex sniper it is cool too as an example of what it used to be. I personally wouldn't do it, but I don't see it as "Bubba."

 

[bananas]

Bubba would drill and mount a Leapers scope on a tactical rail

 

[spider65]

I did mine it was easy but i found original parts not cheap scope cost three times what I paid for rifle, Just have to get it sighted in its close little more work with a file an its ready enjoy Lyle

 

[zeebill]

I think I have repeated this enough times to make my points on these resnipering or creating fake snipers but here we go again, Value of them is in the sum of the parts and price of the work if you can get that which is tough in these times. There are quite few of them out there and that price is hard to get at times. You can hide behind the restore words if you want that is your privilege but however you look at it you created a fake that may or may not be presented as real and over priced to some unsuspecting person down the line. I don't care how many times you tell me you would never do that once you pass it on it is out of your control and anything can happen.

They can be sold to unsuspecting people quite easily because most who know how to tell the fakes keep that information to themselves to try and make the fakes continue to be identified as such. The answer for information on real or not is usually send me pictures and I will give you my take on the fake or not question. Saw two fakes this weekend at one little show and both were built on ex-sniper rifles. One guy had just spent $700 for the one the other was a $550 purchase and at the same show a dealer was selling brand new made over seas fakes for the same $550.

You guys continue to make them and soon the price of parts will far outstrip the selling price of them when you try and sell them plus the next guy down the line in ownership will get burned too. Recognize something whether you agree or not you making them create the problems with ID by doing just that making them. You are responsible for a rifle only while you have it but others take advantage of your handiwork to bilk others so in my eyes the onus is on you period. This is regardless of how you try and explain it off.

Many collectors are now older, myself included, and do not chose to use the online sources or even computers but that is their choice and privilege. You are taking advantage of them by making these available to unscrupulous dealers
who buy your projects and sell to them. Telling me that is their mistake is only your way of shedding responsibility of your actions to ingratiate your ego. I made one of these Frankenstein rifles many years ago and I know I would recognize it and dread the thought the present owner would tell me it is real and he paid $800 for it!

If you really need one of these things buy from the sources that are making them overseas or in country commercially because they are easily ID'd as repro or fake. Tell me you can make one for $550 and you had to buy parts at a rate that is not available in today's market. I see the prices everyday and know about Dunham's, Big 5, and others that sell the ex-snipers at reasonable prices and know what the kits cost and unless you do the work yourself and are lucky and handy it isn't worth the bother. Bill

 

[Plain Old Dave]

My .02: A de-sniper is interesting in its own right. While many were de-snipered with the advent of the SVT, some were de-snipered due to degraded accuracy.

Bottom line: Leave it be and appreciate it for what it IS, not what it WAS. A military gun is a snapshot in time; a picture of what it was the last time it was issued.

All that said, I will set back and munch popcorn and watch the almost-guarenteed restore/not restore flame war.

 

[Fatherandersonthepaladin]

Personal opinion: Go for it. The "purists" can debate it all they want, but that rifle was, at some point in its history, a sniper rifle, and if you have the need to own a representative example of one of the "big scope" snipers, there's no better way to do it without spending a couple grand on one that was never taken apart.

It's similar to the debate over whether semi-auto versions of automatic weapons are worth collecting. Sure, they aren't exactly as they left their country of origin, but if it brings you joy to own it, and it's historically accurate, then go for it (I draw the line at adding modern style scopes... and I'm on the fence about the repros from Accumounts). Also, since this is bringing a historical weapon back to its original "as it left the factory" format rather than hacking part of it out to appease the Bubbas In Chief at the ATF, it seems to me like a relatively respectful treatment of a historical weapon, especially when compared to what those... people... require done to "machineguns" to demil them...

 

[Stalin's Ghost]

I see no more harm in rescoping ex-snipers with authentic scopes than putting the correct engine back in an expensive old sports car, something I have done to cars costing many dozens of times what these rifles cost. Even if the factory or dealer made later modifications "officially" to a high-performance car like a Ferrari or old Alfa or Cobra, an owner can put things back the way they were without criticism in the auto world as long as he tells what work he did.

To me, the "Cn" or "CH" on a Tula shows clearly how it was built to be and chopping off the scope years later is kind of grim, like making a barge out of a sailing yacht.

Would I hesitate to put new pistons, a new starter, rebuilt dual Weber carbs, new paint and a new top on the 1967 Alfa Duetto in my driveway now because somebody 40 years from now might not know they were replaced? Not likely.

I have never used the word "restore" for rescoping rifles - I call it "rescoping," as you all know, and have advocated against many Bubba refinishings of original rifles- I even got a nice PM from a member after I talked him into saving an old Tula.

Is rescoping a bad thing? Some say yes, some say no. I respect both opinions and have a number of rarer ex-snipers left completely alone. The ex-snipers were de-scoped because the Soviets had too many and rescoping them to me seems no more sacrilege than refitting a surplus Jeep or an old Deuce-and-a-half truck taken off the military scrap heap or putting engines and guns back on old warplanes for show use and flying. I do that with old ex-snipers and use them to teach a very brave history.

As to my responsibility to future generations for putting a 1944 Progress scope on a 1944 Tula ex-sniper to show my sons, daughter and dozens of others at the range what the Red snipers of the Great Patriotic War defended their homeland with, I'll take the karma.

 

[r0bb6ub9]

thanks for the opinions guys. I do have a "fake" sniper already, but it does have a original pu scope and half the base is original. I still cant find a original base that mounts to the gun. With this "fake" gun, best im getting is like 2-3" groups at 100 yards. So it made me curious to see what a re-scoped ex sniper would do for me. here's the gun im thinking about doing it to.

 

[Joop]

If you're looking into this project, just for the sake of getting something that's more accurate than what you already have, I would have to ask if you've exhausted all of the possibilities for improving the accuracy of your current rifle. And, have you shot the ex-sniper, yet?

John

 

[mdmosin]

I say go for it, you will learn a lot in the process, and when you are done you will have something to take out in the woods and enjoy, I would start with a repro scope and mount and then after saving up the money, get an original scope and mount. Not many would agree with me but I think the days of $800-$1500 original wall hangers are unsustainable, as are the days of paying $300 for original scopes. I hope I am wrong but going into the future I see people as having less disposable income to spend on this stuff.... Wages are flat and living expenses and taxes will not be.

 

[Fatherandersonthepaladin]

So it made me curious to see what a re-scoped ex sniper would do for me. here's the gun im thinking about doing it to.
View attachment 521685

Your project is a worthy one in my humble opinion. If it's a PU, it might cost you more than just buying an original (or a scopeless example from Samco), but if it's a big scope, you'll have a wonderful legitimate example of a scarce rifle for a fraction of the price of one that was never "ex-snipered".

Also, Stalin's Ghost has an excellent point. No one grumbles about bringing an old Willys Jeep, or a T34/76 back to military correct condition, so I see no problem with bringing an ex-sniper back to the condition in which it left the factory for the first time (and yes, that means tracking down a proper crate and 19 other snipers [resnipered or original] of the same type and preferably the same year to put in there and display [come on, you KNOW you want to]).

However, I can only condone this process on actual ex-snipers and only using the correct style of scope (repros are... problematic to me, because on one hand, they're cheap enough as a placeholder until the real deal can be sourced... but on the other hand, they often incorporate modern improvements [constantly centered reticles, adjustable zoom, etc] that don't fairly represent the original optics, so... I'm really on the fence about them). If you put some kind of hunting scope on there, or scope a 91/30 infantry rifle... well there may be a mob of very angry collectors massing outside your house very shortly thereafter :laugh:

 

[Stalin's Ghost]

Joop, as usual, has it right.
Your "fake" can probably be worked up at no cost to shoot as well as most of my rescoped Tulas, if accuracy is what you are after. Try doing the trigger stoning and the oiled canvas barrel wrap pad inside the forward handguard and stock like the Russkies used to do and try it with both light and heavy ball and some good modern ammo, marking each target carefully. Also, try a rubber recoil pad as most of us tend to flinch a bit after a hundred steel buttplate shots or so, even without knowing it.
Any decent replica was done on a good clean wartime rifle, most are something like a refurb 1944 Izhevsk, and they have good bores and little wear, plus a good refurb. My rescopes are as much history as accuracy -when I want atackdriver, out comes the heavy-barrelled .308 Remington. Many replicas have better bores than most ex-snipers as they had less wear.
Also, never rescope a rifle that hasn't had a serious range vetting out for accuracy before you start, as you are otherwise wasting time and money for no shootable results. If mine won't do about 5 shots into an inch with iron sights and surplus ammo at 50 yards from my lead sled, I would never consider rescoping them. (I'd shoot them with iron sights at 100 yards, but the accuracy problems might come from my eyes and not the rifle!)
Another trick is to let the best shooter you know try your rifle after you -maybe he can get more out of it on any given day.

'

If you're looking into this project, just for the sake of getting something that's more accurate than what you already have, I would have to ask if you've exhausted all of the possibilities for improving the accuracy of your current rifle. And, have you shot the ex-sniper, yet?

John

 

[r0bb6ub9]

If you're looking into this project, just for the sake of getting something that's more accurate than what you already have, I would have to ask if you've exhausted all of the possibilities for improving the accuracy of your current rifle. And, have you shot the ex-sniper, yet?

John

To be honest, no i have not. But, no matter how good of a shot you are how can you compare a scoped rifle to a iron sights rifle and tell witch is more accurate? Its a little apples to oranges in my mind. As far as accuracy in my current one, it is not me. I have that hykore rest where it shoots the gun for you. Takes the human error pretty much out of it.

 

[DaWoof]

My thoughts on this, if anyone cares, is that Tigerman, whose father and uncle worked in the factories that made Mosin sniper rifles; not
only approves of rescoping these rifles, but did most of mine that are rescoped. I've managed to pick up mostly real scopes and mounts
to redo these great rifles and repros came from Dmitry and his scopes and mounts are almost perfect copies. So if Russians who made
these rifles originally, approve of rescoping them, I certainly don't have any heartburn over it.

 

[Joop]

To be honest, no i have not. But, no matter how good of a shot you are how can you compare a scoped rifle to a iron sights rifle and tell witch is more accurate? Its a little apples to oranges in my mind. As far as accuracy in my current one, it is not me. I have that hykore rest where it shoots the gun for you. Takes the human error pretty much out of it.

There's more to it than just the human factor, though. These guns have been refurbished and little/no attention was paid to tuning them like they were, originally. The stock may not fit right and the triggers are not adjusted. Before you can determine how much of a factor you are in the equation, you've got to get the rifle shooting to it's potential. With a properly tuned rifle, you can out-shoot guys with scopes that have not tuned their guns, using just the irons. And, theoretically, you should be able to shoot as good of a group with the irons, as with the scope, at shorter ranges, just by holding it in the same spot, every time. Easier said than done, of course, but a scope does absolutely nothing for action fit, barrel tension, or the trigger, if you get what I mean.

Don't get the idea that I'm trying to talk you out of "re-snipering" an ex-sniper. Quite to the contrary, as I've done several, myself. But, if the only reason you want to do it, is because one rifle isn't shooting to your expectations, I'm only suggesting that you figure out why, before giving up on it and moving on to another. Use that rifle as a test bed for some of these little tricks and you'll be surprised. Then, when you do restore an ex-sniper (actually, I hope you do a whole rack full of 'em!), you'll be prepared to get them shooting their best, from the beginning.

Check out this thread. It's one of many similar examples of rifles that I've worked with. Pay particular attention to post #30 and the results gained from the simple addition of a card shim in the handguard.

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthr...unt-Has-Arrived!-*Range-Report-Added-3-21-10*

There are plenty of other factors involved, too. But, I think you get the idea. The hard part is tracking down the possible issues with the rifle. But, with some help in identifying them, you can go through a basic checklist of things and see what works and what doesn't. Feel free to send me a PM and I can help you get things sorted out.

John

 

[r0bb6ub9]

There's more to it than just the human factor, though. These guns have been refurbished and little/no attention was paid to tuning them like they were, originally. The stock may not fit right and the triggers are not adjusted. Before you can determine how much of a factor you are in the equation, you've got to get the rifle shooting to it's potential. With a properly tuned rifle, you can out-shoot guys with scopes that have not tuned their guns, using just the irons. And, theoretically, you should be able to shoot as good of a group with the irons, as with the scope, at shorter ranges, just by holding it in the same spot, every time. Easier said than done, of course, but a scope does absolutely nothing for action fit, barrel tension, or the trigger, if you get what I mean.

Don't get the idea that I'm trying to talk you out of "re-snipering" an ex-sniper. Quite to the contrary, as I've done several, myself. But, if the only reason you want to do it, is because one rifle isn't shooting to your expectations, I'm only suggesting that you figure out why, before giving up on it and moving on to another. Use that rifle as a test bed for some of these little tricks and you'll be surprised. Then, when you do restore an ex-sniper (actually, I hope you do a whole rack full of 'em!), you'll be prepared to get them shooting their best, from the beginning.

Check out this thread. It's one of many similar examples of rifles that I've worked with. Pay particular attention to post #30 and the results gained from the simple addition of a card shim in the handguard.

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?164270-My-37-Top-Mount-Has-Arrived!-*Range-Report-Added-3-21-10*

There are plenty of other factors involved, too. But, I think you get the idea. The hard part is tracking down the possible issues with the rifle. But, with some help in identifying them, you can go through a basic checklist of things and see what works and what doesn't. Feel free to send me a PM and I can help you get things sorted out.

John

Very interesting post John. I will have to look more into my rifle. I did not say however i was giving up on my "fake" one. I still love that gun as is was my first "sniper." I kind of just wanted another being i have a scope and half of a mount laying in the cabinet. I pretty much just assumed that i'd get a little more accuracy out of my ex. I will look closer at my fake. Thanks

 

[Joop]

Roger that. Do them all!:thumbsup: