Tactics M38 vs. MN30/91 vs. M44

[skypirate]

Where did this bayonet effects accuracy myth come from?

From real life. Mosin-Nagants are sighted in from the factory with the bayonet attached. So they are more accurate WITH the bayonet attached.

Take the bayonet off and the Mosin will usually shoot a couple inches left or right of target. Why does the bayonet have an effect? I don't know. It's been explained to me a few ways. First is that the bayonet somehow puts pressure on the barrel. Second is that it interferes with the powder burn aerodynamics as the bullet is leaving the barrel.

But I know from first hand experience that my M44 and my 91/30 shoot better when the bayonet is attached/extended.

 

[Jaesperson]

on the old boards someone explained it to me like this:
when you shoot a gun, it naturally causes vibrations, these vibrations of course also take effect on the bullet. now when the bayo is attached these vobrations change somewhat (i dont know how or why, maybe its something about the center of mass of the gun that

 

[Kurtz]

Pretty much anything touching the barrel will effect the barrel harmonics in a negative way, even if they're firmly mounted to the barrel (such as the sights, or the handguards). That's why improved stock beddings or even free-floating the entire barrel is common today. This was not unknown at the time either, which is why the swiss used a partially free-floated barrel on their k31 rifles.

The bayonet causing less accuracy idea is only partly related to how the rifles are sighted in at the factory. Even though adding or removing the bayonet will change the point of impact (a grouping will be in a different spot with or without the bayonet), adding a bayonet that contacts the barrel will make each shot less precise (ie more deviation, it'll shoot a larger group), even if the rifle is sighted in with the bayonet. Whether the group will be noticably larger out of a mosin-nagant or k98 is debatable though.

 

[{YBBS}Sage]

The carbines do seem a bit easier to swing around in close-quarters. It's also easier to work tight corners with a carbine without putting your muzzle past them into the open to tell everybody that "here I come!!!"

I have noticed a difference in carbine vs 91/30 accuracy, but it's only at longer distances, really. Anything under about 100 yards, they seem to have the same minute of man accuracy.

Anything over 100 yards, go with the big boy.

Edit: Skypirate, I can tell you why the bayo on a 91/30 affects the point of impact (mine was about 2 inches left at 100 yd.)

I can grip the muzzle of my rifle in one hand and literally flex the barrel back and forth against the stock and handguards. The Soviets put some rather thin-walled barrels on those rifles. (The Finnish Mosins are better, mainly 'cause they used heavier barrels.)

 

[skypirate]

Pretty much anything touching the barrel will effect the barrel harmonics in a negative way, even if they're firmly mounted to the barrel (such as the sights, or the handguards). That's why improved stock beddings or even free-floating the entire barrel is common today. This was not unknown at the time either, which is why the swiss used a partially free-floated barrel on their k31 rifles.

The bayonet causing less accuracy idea is only partly related to how the rifles are sighted in at the factory. Even though adding or removing the bayonet will change the point of impact (a grouping will be in a different spot with or without the bayonet), adding a bayonet that contacts the barrel will make each shot less precise (ie more deviation, it'll shoot a larger group), even if the rifle is sighted in with the bayonet. Whether the group will be noticably larger out of a mosin-nagant or k98 is debatable though.

I was going to mention free-floating barrels but you beat me to it. All modern sniper rifles have free-floated barrels.

There are many things that effect where a bullet will land:

1) Ammunition (caliber, grains, powder charge, quality, bullet type, etc.)
2) Wind (especially over greater distances and with lighter bullets)
3) Barrel heat (when barrels get hot, accuracy decreases)
4) Shooter skill (obviously)
5) Sights and optics (because this affects the aim of the gun)
6) Rest (firing from sandbags, from a bipod, prone, off-hand, etc.)
7) Barrel wear and condition (rifling, crown damage, dirty, etc.)
8) Type and make of gun used (obviously)
9) Pressure against barrel (free floating, bayonet, etc.)
10) Muzzle brakes and flash hiders

And much, much more...

 

[skypirate]

The carbines do seem a bit easier to swing around in close-quarters. It's also easier to work tight corners with a carbine without putting your muzzle past them into the open to tell everybody that "here I come!!!"

I have noticed a difference in carbine vs 91/30 accuracy, but it's only at longer distances, really. Anything under about 100 yards, they seem to have the same minute of man accuracy.

Anything over 100 yards, go with the big boy.

Edit: Skypirate, I can tell you why the bayo on a 91/30 affects the point of impact (mine was about 2 inches left at 100 yd.)

I can grip the muzzle of my rifle in one hand and literally flex the barrel back and forth against the stock and handguards. The Soviets put some rather thin-walled barrels on those rifles. (The Finnish Mosins are better, mainly 'cause they used heavier barrels.)

Yeah, although it's not just my 91/30 but also my M44 that's affected (and there's less flex with that since the barrel is shorter).

Without bayonets attached/extended, the 91/30 shoots 1-2 inches RIGHT at 50 yards, the M44 shoots about 1 inch LEFT at 50 yards. With bayonets attached/extended, they both shoot to point of aim.

I love my Mosins. Very accurate rifles, built like tanks, very fun (huge BOOM!!!) and quite affordable.

 

[{YBBS}Sage]

Yeah, although it's not just my 91/30 but also my M44 that's affected (and there's less flex with that since the barrel is shorter).

Without bayonets attached/extended, the 91/30 shoots 1-2 inches RIGHT at 50 yards, the M44 shoots about 1 inch LEFT at 50 yards. With bayonets attached/extended, they both shoot to point of aim.

I love my Mosins. Very accurate rifles, built like tanks, very fun (huge BOOM!!!) and quite affordable.

I never tried my 91/30 with the bayonet before I re-sighted it, but it was hitting 2" left at 100 yards... I kind of assumed that it would have hit on (if still high) with the bayonet on.

The barrel's shorter on the M44, sure, but it's still not a heavy barrel. Eh, math is trying to invade my brain now, and it hurts... Must find tequila...

I love my Mosin. Great guns, and you can't beat the price.

 

[[tR]Mad Mac]

on the old boards someone explained it to me like this:
when you shoot a gun, it naturally causes vibrations, these vibrations of course also take effect on the bullet. now when the bayo is attached these vobrations change somewhat (i dont know how or why, maybe its something about the center of mass of the gun that

 

[GonzoX]

Where did this bayonet effects accuracy myth come from? Anyway...I like the m44, it fits me like a frickin glove. I love the bayonet so I don't have to worry about hitting a button and accidently taking it off during a fight (that has happened to me before ). It is also a shorter and just as accurate as any other rifle in the game for the average shootout for this game. Now for the really long shots I would prefer mn30. It really depends on your style of play. If you like sitting back and taking the long shots and you don't like getting in to close quarter combat take the mn30. If you like to be able to get in close and be effective and also be able to hit those distance targets go with the m44, forget the m38 its completely outclassed.

It is not a myth it is a fact.

Ask those of us that actually own and shoot them.

May not make a difference in this game but in the real world you have a thing called harmonic ballance. And the russians sighted in all weapons with bayonet attached.

If Tripiwire wanted to be realistic then they would implement this and also have the 91/30 start off with bayo attached. Russian soldiers would get a butt chewing if they took their bayo off for this reason.

 

[Solo4114]

As a practical matter (back to the original subject here), I recommend using the M44 in any situation where you want a close-to-mid range rifle and don't have a semi-auto option or want the somewhat higher accuracy of a boltie.

I played Kurland Kessel yesterday as the Russians and for the first flag you definitely want the 91/30 -- long range it'll be more accurate. At the second flag you can go either way. At the third point (the trenches) absolutely take the M44. It shoulders a little faster, moves in free-aim faster, and has the bayonet. The M38 is obsolete when you have the option of the M44. If you only had the choice, it's a toss-up: either choose one for the bayonet, or the other for rapid shouldering.

 

[Boosh]

I'm an M44 guy myself. I love the bayonet's length with a carbine's stock. bayo plus the gun it's about as long as the 91/30. On maps like Kaukasus, where I find I need the long range to pick off targets, I love the 91/30. For closer quarters in the early years, I'm all about the 38. But later in the war I'm all for that M44 carbine. Mostly it's personal preference.

 

[Necro]

i tend to use em all, switching out evenly!

 

[Silky_Slim]

I own a m38 and i shoot better with it ingame than the m44 or the 91/30 despite them all being practicaly identical.
M38 all the way!

EDIT: Just got off of Bonderevo, and made what had to be atleast a 150-200 yard shot with the m38!, the porry jerry was only a ant compared to the front sight blade, missed my first shot but the 2nd pluged him! i was looking out the first floor window of the farmhouse and he was just entering the weatfields on the other end when my 2nd shot found its mark.

 

[Berentzen]

take the m44, its the strongest of the russians. (at least it was so in real war)

 

[Petrovich-]

I don't really notice a diffrence between any of them so I always take the old fasioned Mosin Nagant, none of the carbines.

 

[Ralfst3r]

Would be nice if someone could compile some sort of chart with ingame statistics, cuz i never have felt any diffirence between the 3. I ussually end up with the M44, cuz it's just cooler looking, and the bayo is already attached.

 

[[5.SS]Stuka]

I love the m44

 

[Velcro Warrior]

I prefer the M38; I shoot more accurately with it in real life, as well as in game; Plus the lack of a bayonet forces me to smack people in the head...

 

[piller]

Ill almost always take a bolt action rifle. When im german its the kar98k ofcourse, and when im russian I will chose the MN 91/30. Its a lot of personaly taste, whichever you feel you do better with.

I've heard people say that the m38 is better for its aiming time, bolting time etc. Weather it is or isnt it cant be too much of a difference.

What I reccomend to anyone is that they try out the difference weapons, find what they like and STICK WITH IT. The more you use the same weapon (in my opinion) the better you will become with it. You will begin to learn how it acts and behaves and know what it will do. You can learn what your capable of hitting and what your not.

 

[Reddog]

The M38 and M44 are definitely less accurate. Just an hour ago playing Konigsplatz I took a wild snap shot at a guy with my M44 with my sights actually high and to the right of him and because of the guns latent innacuracy and a heap of luck my shot actually hit him.

I used to use the M38 heaps in the mod but these days with the better melee system in Ostfront I will always take the gun with the bayonet, which means either the M91/30 or M44 depending on the map

Also, soldiers ALWAYS attach your bayonet!