I'm very tempted . . . - The Firearms Forum

Pistolenschutze · 05-02-2006, 09:51 AM

I mentioned on this forum a couple of weeks ago that I had bought and refinished a Swiss Schmidt-Rubin K-31 rifle in 6.5x55 caliber. As most of you I'm sure already know, the S-R is kind of a strange looking weapon by our standards. Instead of a traditonal bolt, like a Mauser or Mosin, the S-R cocks and ejects with a bolt that pulls straight backward; in other words, it is not necessary to lift the bolt then pull to eject a spent round and chamber another. only pull straight backwards on the bolt. Supposedly, it was designed this way to eliminate the need for the shooter to lift his arm in combat and possibly expose himself. In any event, to accomplish this requires some pretty ingenious engineering, a trait for which the Swiss are justifiably noted. The rifle I bought works, if you'll pardon the cliche, "like a Swiss watch," smoothly and efficiently.

I noted from the beginning, however, that the rifle had one drawback, or actually two depending on one's viewpoint. First, the barrel and action are built like a German Tiger tank (unlike the tinfoil armor on an M-4, Polish

), and thus it is heavier than most combat-rifle barrelled actions. This makes for an extremely strong and reliable rifle. Combined with the weight of the wood military stock, however, it's like toting around a sack of #6 lead shot for shotshell reloading. The second problem is more aesthetic: It is, as some have called the B-52 bomber, one gigantic BUFF (Xracer can probably translate that acronym for those unfamiliar with it, but it begins, "Big, Ugly, Fat . . .

). Anyway, what to do to satisfy my aesthetic sense and produce a rifle I will actually take out to the range and shoot often?

The solution lies with the people at Boyd's Gunstocks. These folks specialize in producing extremely nice but relatively inexpensive wood sporter stocks for old military weapons, along with many modern stocks. If you Cruffle, you really should check out their sight: http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/ Boyd's is the only stock maker who produces a nice walnut stock for the K-31 so far as I know, and it is a beauty. I ordered up one yesterday for the K-31. It is semi-inletted so I will have to do a little work with the old Dremel tool and then refinish it, but that is part of the fun. I'll let y'all know how it turns out and post a few pictures when it is finished.

JohnK3 · 05-02-2006, 10:57 AM

Aw, PS! That's not a "BUFF!" That stock is "beaver-chewed!"

inplanotx · 05-02-2006, 10:58 AM

What you are forgetting here PS is that the rifle was designed to do no more than shoot downhill. They didn't need to worry about coming uphill. And I thought that yours was like mine in 7.5x55? I thought the Swede was in 6.5x55.

MRMIKE08075 · 05-02-2006, 12:29 PM

GRAFS sells a DIOPTER rear and GLOBE front match target sight set (INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC style)...

GRAFS sells a repro of the original offset SNIPER scope mount...

GRAFS used to offer a laminate thumbhole stock...

NUMRICH offers a walnut stock set...

both offer replacement / spare magazines...

SPORTSMANS GUIDE offers some accsesories...

i own 3 K31`s...

all are TACK DRIVERS

all 2 are MOA or better with issue battle sights out to 250 yds...

bayonets are available but expect to spend $75.00-$125.00 for a last issue standard model...

SAWBACK PIONEER bayonets are realy expensive...

you will need to check under your buttplate for a possible surprise...

7.5X55 SWISS

surplus match grade target ammo is cheap and plentiful...

HORNADY makes nice ammo as well...

good gun.

best regards, mike.

Pistolenschutze · 05-02-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inplanotx

They didn't need to worry about coming uphill. And I thought that yours was like mine in 7.5x55?)

Oops! My typing skills would not qualify me for a high-paying secretary's job, nor my proofreading skills either, or so it would seem. You are, of course, quite correct, Plano, it is indeed chambered for the 7.5x55. I must make a note: "Engage brain before engaging fingers."

JohnK3 · 05-02-2006, 02:39 PM

I've got one of those St. Marie Graphics Diopter sets from Grafs. NICE!

polishshooter · 05-03-2006, 11:23 PM

I can probably reload and make more noise quicker than you with my M95 Styer! ( I doubt I could HIT better than you though, it's tough to shoot a group when you are aiming like 3 feet LOW at 100 with it....

)

I've always LOVED the straight-pull, and can't figure why more weren't made...except MAYBE the Ross and the 6mm Navy Lee were such PIGS nobody in the "New World" wanted anything to do with it???

Or else because JMB never designed one???

Pistolenschutze · 05-04-2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

Or else because JMB never designed one???

Actually, Polish, the action on that K-31 is so clever I'm surprised ol' John Moses didn't design something like it. It looks wierd to us because we are so used to the traditional bolt action, but it does make sense nonetheless, at least as a combat weapon. I'm looking forward to seeing how it looks and functions in a sporter-type stock.

MRMIKE08075 · 05-04-2006, 11:58 AM

HEY!!!

i own a M1905 ROSS straight pull .303 (US PROPERTY marked / ORD bomb and SCREAMING EAGLE head proofed US MARTIAL ARM)...

i own a LEE-NAVY straight pull .236 USN (saw use in the BOXER REBELLION)...

both are tack drivers, both won tons of trophies in compatition...

the ROSS M1910 was a dog, and could be reassembled incoorectly causing a catastrophic and fatal failure in the bolt lock up...

but the 1905 ROSS is a sweatheart...

are we repeating stories from the past or speaking from actual experiance???

i would take both guns into battle with no hesitation.

best regards, mike.

polishshooter · 05-04-2006, 06:21 PM

No, MrMike I admit no actual firing experience with either, beisdes handling them at shows, and handling one overpriced pieces missing and rusty Ross at the Flea market in Friendship. And I KNOW, I'm ALWAYS the first to yell at somebody who repeats as fact JUST what he read in only a COUPLE of sources....

Sorry!

But somehow a weapon that could be reassembled wrong and still be fired with a chance of blowing doesn't seem to be a good choice to hand to a newly recruited soldier or a tired, cold, wet, and hungry Tommy in the mud of the trenches at night...

As far as the Lee goes, yeah it did the job with the Peking Legation Defense, and relief, but even back then there was grumblings from the USMC that they were getting the Navy's "crap..." and they didn't like the "small" round either...plus ANY weapon the Marines have is going to function if they have anything to do with it, (except maybe the Reising...) and it DID screw up the ammo supply...

HEY! The KRAG actually sucked as a combat weapon, but it did it's job, and my wife's grandpas was GREAT to shoot and killed a lot of deer in his lifetime too, and I wish I HAD it....

But in reality the ONLY straight pul with "extensive" combat use in two world wars was the M95....

MRMIKE08075 · 05-05-2006, 08:12 AM

OK...

there were severe "teething" problems with the ROSS MODEL 1905...

ammo not made to very tight specs would not feed and extract with ease in the early models...

ammo that had been stored under dubious conditions (heat, humidity, etc...) or made to looser specs by foriegn contractors also was problimatic...

this was fixed by enlarging the chamber / rifles marked "LC" on the BBL-rec connection have been so modified...

the locking system on the later ROSS MODEL 1910 was an interuppted thread design that could be assembled incorrectly, but the 1905 did not have that problem...

the multi-adjustable micrometer peep sights on the ROSS are perhaps a bit overwhelming for a new conscript to use in warfare, but i find them delightful...

the gun will outshoot the `03 and the KRAG easily...

its an odd duck that takes some getting used to.

the .236 USN LEE-NAVY is a sweet piece...

the "complaints" said to have been made by the USMC are more correctly labeled as normal soldiers grumbling than serious historical commentary...

the high velocity, small bore, new fangled cartridge had amazing performance #`s, but "new" is sometimes seen as "bad" initialy...

very slick action, high degree of accuracy, good balance, etc...

i would prefer the LEE to the ROSS as a combat arm, but the ROSS is a better match gun...

then again, the K31 is better than both in my experiance and estimation.

open to questions.

best regards, mike.

LDBennett · 05-05-2006, 08:13 AM

I have a K-31 too, but I do not look at it expecting to see a thing of beauty. I see a piece of European history that I can use. It so happens that it shoots well too. I have more modern guns that are things of beauty.

Modify it? Never!

Re-finish it? Never! That would reduce the evidence of history.

Have all you K-31 owners removed the butt plate to find the paper that tells to whom it was originally assigned? Some people have even attempted to contact the original owners with some success. That's history!

LDBennett

Pistolenschutze · 05-05-2006, 09:08 AM

Generally, I agree with you LD, which is why I have been exceedingly careful to do no permanent modifications of the K-31. When I am finished, the original stock will still be entirely intact as will all of the original hardware and those parts will be very carefully stored away. I can change the rifle back from nice looking sporter to full military configuration in less than 10 minutes. As as matter of fact, I did find the owner's note with the gun behind the butt plate. That piece of history will always stay with with weapon.

polishshooter · 05-05-2006, 08:10 PM

The Only REAL problem I have with the Swiss stuff, is pretty much the same problem with the Swedish Mauser...NIETHER of them were actually tried in the "crucible" of actual warfare...OK, I'll give you the Swede, SOME of them saw action with the Finns against the Russians, but then again, Simo Haya used that "presentation" one for a few of his kills, but then went back to the Mosin because it was 'More accurate and harder hitting..."

IS the K-31 REALLY a significant contributer to Military History? NOT to denigrate it, I LIKE it, and it IS beautiful, BUT...

I can't HELP but wonder if "Like a Swiss watch" is NOT something you would want in a REAL military rifle.

Now OTHER Swiss designs were READILY made, copied and used by other countries, noteably the Oerlikon (Or was it the Bofors?

I forget...but then again this applies to the SWEDES too...) We also saw MANY Solothern designs as well, used by BOTH sides. As well as some Lahti AT guns, etc....

Why NOT a Swiss straught pull RIFLE???

Just a thought...

Pistolenschutze · 05-06-2006, 08:52 AM

Polish, at least the Swiss, the Mauser 98, the American Springfield, and the British Enfield had one thing that made them far superior to the Russian bolt actions (91/30, 38, and 44): A safety system that wasn't designed by a drunk peasant with a death wish! I have never seen a poorer safety on any rifle. I'm beginning to suspect it wasn't the Germans who caused so many Russian casualties, it was the Russians shooting each other in the butt!

polishshooter · 05-06-2006, 07:19 PM

Safety???

Comrade you are a SOVIET soldier you are meant to be DEADLY at all times. Why do you think we issue bayonet sheaths NOT!

We do NOT use "Safeties" SAFETY is a capitalist TRICK and a LUXURY no soldier of the Proletariat would DEFILE himself with using!!!!

(Besides, Comrade, if you hold the trigger forward while lowering the bolt on the live round, and let the cocking piece follow it home, it is SAFE enough, then just rock the bolt up and down when needed quickly!

)

(Just don't drop the rifle, please, Comrade!

)

HEY, it is NOT the worse! Try an ARISAKA'S!!!

But you know ALL Russian guns have pretty ill-concieved safeties/selectors...the awkward position of it, and LOUD click clack on switching it from full to semi to safe on a AK 47 leaves me to believe either a LOT of ambushes were blown by half trained VC in Nam, or they TOO carried them with it off and left it at that....that was one of the knocks on the Galil and Valmet too, one feature they both wished they did NOT copy exactly, although I think the Galil had an additional crossbolt one in a "normal" position BESIDES the loud selector.

Speaking of which, isn't it amazing how relatively quickly the Israelis dumped the Galil? I'm not sure I've seen one in any recent pictures, except with reserves and police...

wolfgang2000 · 05-06-2006, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

Speaking of which, isn't it amazing how relatively quickly the Israelis dumped the Galil? I'm not sure I've seen one in any recent pictures, except with reserves and police...

There use to be a Isrielis special forces web site (it is a pay site now) that talked about that. The main reason is weight. There are still units that issue it, as there are units that are issued the AK. But if given the choice they perfer the M16 carbine.

I wish that site was still open to the public. It had a lot of good info on it.

Pistolenschutze · 05-07-2006, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

(Besides, Comrade, if you hold the trigger forward while lowering the bolt on the live round, and let the cocking piece follow it home, it is SAFE enough, then just rock the bolt up and down when needed quickly! )

By which time Herr Shickelgruber and his Mauser 98 will have drilled the Rooski right between the peepers with a 7.92x57, assuming one of his comrades hadn't done it with a 7.62x54R sometime previously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

But you know ALL Russian guns have pretty ill-concieved safeties/selectors...the awkward position of it, and LOUD click clack on switching it from full to semi to safe on a AK 47 leaves me to believe either a LOT of ambushes were blown by half trained VC in Nam, or they TOO carried them with it off and left it at that.

Charlie was more fond of trip wires tied to handgrenades, mines, or a covered hole with sharpened bamboo stakes at the bottom. I'll leave what he dipped those stakes in to your imagination. When he did stage a fire fight--not an uncommon occurrance--his fire discipline was usually pretty good. That's why the point man's job was so vital and all of us hated it so much. If the point man doesn't hear something, or see movement, it got pretty harry PDQ.

05-02-2006, 09:51 AM	#1
Pistolenschutze Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 13,094	I'm very tempted . . . I mentioned on this forum a couple of weeks ago that I had bought and refinished a Swiss Schmidt-Rubin K-31 rifle in 6.5x55 caliber. As most of you I'm sure already know, the S-R is kind of a strange looking weapon by our standards. Instead of a traditonal bolt, like a Mauser or Mosin, the S-R cocks and ejects with a bolt that pulls straight backward; in other words, it is not necessary to lift the bolt then pull to eject a spent round and chamber another. only pull straight backwards on the bolt. Supposedly, it was designed this way to eliminate the need for the shooter to lift his arm in combat and possibly expose himself. In any event, to accomplish this requires some pretty ingenious engineering, a trait for which the Swiss are justifiably noted. The rifle I bought works, if you'll pardon the cliche, "like a Swiss watch," smoothly and efficiently. I noted from the beginning, however, that the rifle had one drawback, or actually two depending on one's viewpoint. First, the barrel and action are built like a German Tiger tank (unlike the tinfoil armor on an M-4, Polish ), and thus it is heavier than most combat-rifle barrelled actions. This makes for an extremely strong and reliable rifle. Combined with the weight of the wood military stock, however, it's like toting around a sack of #6 lead shot for shotshell reloading. The second problem is more aesthetic: It is, as some have called the B-52 bomber, one gigantic BUFF (Xracer can probably translate that acronym for those unfamiliar with it, but it begins, "Big, Ugly, Fat . . . ). Anyway, what to do to satisfy my aesthetic sense and produce a rifle I will actually take out to the range and shoot often? The solution lies with the people at Boyd's Gunstocks. These folks specialize in producing extremely nice but relatively inexpensive wood sporter stocks for old military weapons, along with many modern stocks. If you Cruffle, you really should check out their sight: http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/ Boyd's is the only stock maker who produces a nice walnut stock for the K-31 so far as I know, and it is a beauty. I ordered up one yesterday for the K-31. It is semi-inletted so I will have to do a little work with the old Dremel tool and then refinish it, but that is part of the fun. I'll let y'all know how it turns out and post a few pictures when it is finished. __________________ --Pistolenschutze (Pistol Shooter) -->

05-02-2006, 10:57 AM	#2
JohnK3 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,636	Re: I'm very tempted . . . Aw, PS! That's not a "BUFF!" That stock is "beaver-chewed!"

05-02-2006, 10:58 AM	#3
inplanotx Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 8,897	Re: I'm very tempted . . . What you are forgetting here PS is that the rifle was designed to do no more than shoot downhill. They didn't need to worry about coming uphill. And I thought that yours was like mine in 7.5x55? I thought the Swede was in 6.5x55. __________________

05-02-2006, 12:29 PM	#4
MRMIKE08075 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 384	Re: I'm very tempted . . . GRAFS sells a DIOPTER rear and GLOBE front match target sight set (INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC style)... GRAFS sells a repro of the original offset SNIPER scope mount... GRAFS used to offer a laminate thumbhole stock... NUMRICH offers a walnut stock set... both offer replacement / spare magazines... SPORTSMANS GUIDE offers some accsesories... i own 3 K31`s... all are TACK DRIVERS all 2 are MOA or better with issue battle sights out to 250 yds... bayonets are available but expect to spend $75.00-$125.00 for a last issue standard model... SAWBACK PIONEER bayonets are realy expensive... you will need to check under your buttplate for a possible surprise... 7.5X55 SWISS surplus match grade target ammo is cheap and plentiful... HORNADY makes nice ammo as well... good gun. best regards, mike.

05-03-2006, 11:23 PM	#7
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: I'm very tempted . . . I can probably reload and make more noise quicker than you with my M95 Styer! ( I doubt I could HIT better than you though, it's tough to shoot a group when you are aiming like 3 feet LOW at 100 with it.... ) I've always LOVED the straight-pull, and can't figure why more weren't made...except MAYBE the Ross and the 6mm Navy Lee were such PIGS nobody in the "New World" wanted anything to do with it??? Or else because JMB never designed one??? __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

05-02-2006, 02:39 PM	#6
JohnK3 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,636	Re: I'm very tempted . . . I've got one of those St. Marie Graphics Diopter sets from Grafs. NICE!

05-04-2006, 11:58 AM	#9
MRMIKE08075 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 384	Re: I'm very tempted . . . HEY!!! i own a M1905 ROSS straight pull .303 (US PROPERTY marked / ORD bomb and SCREAMING EAGLE head proofed US MARTIAL ARM)... i own a LEE-NAVY straight pull .236 USN (saw use in the BOXER REBELLION)... both are tack drivers, both won tons of trophies in compatition... the ROSS M1910 was a dog, and could be reassembled incoorectly causing a catastrophic and fatal failure in the bolt lock up... but the 1905 ROSS is a sweatheart... are we repeating stories from the past or speaking from actual experiance??? i would take both guns into battle with no hesitation. best regards, mike. Last edited by MRMIKE08075; 05-04-2006 at 12:18 PM..

05-04-2006, 06:21 PM	#10
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: I'm very tempted . . . No, MrMike I admit no actual firing experience with either, beisdes handling them at shows, and handling one overpriced pieces missing and rusty Ross at the Flea market in Friendship. And I KNOW, I'm ALWAYS the first to yell at somebody who repeats as fact JUST what he read in only a COUPLE of sources.... Sorry! But somehow a weapon that could be reassembled wrong and still be fired with a chance of blowing doesn't seem to be a good choice to hand to a newly recruited soldier or a tired, cold, wet, and hungry Tommy in the mud of the trenches at night... As far as the Lee goes, yeah it did the job with the Peking Legation Defense, and relief, but even back then there was grumblings from the USMC that they were getting the Navy's "crap..." and they didn't like the "small" round either...plus ANY weapon the Marines have is going to function if they have anything to do with it, (except maybe the Reising...) and it DID screw up the ammo supply... HEY! The KRAG actually sucked as a combat weapon, but it did it's job, and my wife's grandpas was GREAT to shoot and killed a lot of deer in his lifetime too, and I wish I HAD it.... But in reality the ONLY straight pul with "extensive" combat use in two world wars was the M95.... __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

05-05-2006, 08:12 AM	#11
MRMIKE08075 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 384	Re: I'm very tempted . . . OK... there were severe "teething" problems with the ROSS MODEL 1905... ammo not made to very tight specs would not feed and extract with ease in the early models... ammo that had been stored under dubious conditions (heat, humidity, etc...) or made to looser specs by foriegn contractors also was problimatic... this was fixed by enlarging the chamber / rifles marked "LC" on the BBL-rec connection have been so modified... the locking system on the later ROSS MODEL 1910 was an interuppted thread design that could be assembled incorrectly, but the 1905 did not have that problem... the multi-adjustable micrometer peep sights on the ROSS are perhaps a bit overwhelming for a new conscript to use in warfare, but i find them delightful... the gun will outshoot the `03 and the KRAG easily... its an odd duck that takes some getting used to. the .236 USN LEE-NAVY is a sweet piece... the "complaints" said to have been made by the USMC are more correctly labeled as normal soldiers grumbling than serious historical commentary... the high velocity, small bore, new fangled cartridge had amazing performance #`s, but "new" is sometimes seen as "bad" initialy... very slick action, high degree of accuracy, good balance, etc... i would prefer the LEE to the ROSS as a combat arm, but the ROSS is a better match gun... then again, the K31 is better than both in my experiance and estimation. open to questions. best regards, mike.

05-05-2006, 08:13 AM	#12
LDBennett Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 5,715	Re: I'm very tempted . . . I have a K-31 too, but I do not look at it expecting to see a thing of beauty. I see a piece of European history that I can use. It so happens that it shoots well too. I have more modern guns that are things of beauty. Modify it? Never! Re-finish it? Never! That would reduce the evidence of history. Have all you K-31 owners removed the butt plate to find the paper that tells to whom it was originally assigned? Some people have even attempted to contact the original owners with some success. That's history! LDBennett

05-05-2006, 09:08 AM	#13
Pistolenschutze Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 13,094	Re: I'm very tempted . . . Generally, I agree with you LD, which is why I have been exceedingly careful to do no permanent modifications of the K-31. When I am finished, the original stock will still be entirely intact as will all of the original hardware and those parts will be very carefully stored away. I can change the rifle back from nice looking sporter to full military configuration in less than 10 minutes. As as matter of fact, I did find the owner's note with the gun behind the butt plate. That piece of history will always stay with with weapon. __________________ --Pistolenschutze (Pistol Shooter)

05-05-2006, 08:10 PM	#14
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: I'm very tempted . . . The Only REAL problem I have with the Swiss stuff, is pretty much the same problem with the Swedish Mauser...NIETHER of them were actually tried in the "crucible" of actual warfare...OK, I'll give you the Swede, SOME of them saw action with the Finns against the Russians, but then again, Simo Haya used that "presentation" one for a few of his kills, but then went back to the Mosin because it was 'More accurate and harder hitting..." IS the K-31 REALLY a significant contributer to Military History? NOT to denigrate it, I LIKE it, and it IS beautiful, BUT... I can't HELP but wonder if "Like a Swiss watch" is NOT something you would want in a REAL military rifle. Now OTHER Swiss designs were READILY made, copied and used by other countries, noteably the Oerlikon (Or was it the Bofors? I forget...but then again this applies to the SWEDES too...) We also saw MANY Solothern designs as well, used by BOTH sides. As well as some Lahti AT guns, etc.... Why NOT a Swiss straught pull RIFLE??? Just a thought... __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

05-06-2006, 08:52 AM	#15
Pistolenschutze Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 13,094	Re: I'm very tempted . . . Polish, at least the Swiss, the Mauser 98, the American Springfield, and the British Enfield had one thing that made them far superior to the Russian bolt actions (91/30, 38, and 44): A safety system that wasn't designed by a drunk peasant with a death wish! I have never seen a poorer safety on any rifle. I'm beginning to suspect it wasn't the Germans who caused so many Russian casualties, it was the Russians shooting each other in the butt! __________________ --Pistolenschutze (Pistol Shooter)

05-06-2006, 07:19 PM	#16
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: I'm very tempted . . . Safety??? Comrade you are a SOVIET soldier you are meant to be DEADLY at all times. Why do you think we issue bayonet sheaths NOT! We do NOT use "Safeties" SAFETY is a capitalist TRICK and a LUXURY no soldier of the Proletariat would DEFILE himself with using!!!! (Besides, Comrade, if you hold the trigger forward while lowering the bolt on the live round, and let the cocking piece follow it home, it is SAFE enough, then just rock the bolt up and down when needed quickly! ) (Just don't drop the rifle, please, Comrade! ) HEY, it is NOT the worse! Try an ARISAKA'S!!! But you know ALL Russian guns have pretty ill-concieved safeties/selectors...the awkward position of it, and LOUD click clack on switching it from full to semi to safe on a AK 47 leaves me to believe either a LOT of ambushes were blown by half trained VC in Nam, or they TOO carried them with it off and left it at that....that was one of the knocks on the Galil and Valmet too, one feature they both wished they did NOT copy exactly, although I think the Galil had an additional crossbolt one in a "normal" position BESIDES the loud selector. Speaking of which, isn't it amazing how relatively quickly the Israelis dumped the Galil? I'm not sure I've seen one in any recent pictures, except with reserves and police... __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living. Last edited by polishshooter; 05-06-2006 at 07:26 PM..