Frolovka 32 caliber belongs to the category of guns, which were converted into hunting options from worn or decommissioned combat rifles of the model of 1891 and later. In Russia, this type of weapon began to gain popularity in 1920, the name comes from the name of the gunsmith who worked at the Tula plant as a designer. It would seem, what is the rationale for remaking uncomfortable and unsuitable army models for hunting? Isn’t it easier to just release standard hunting versions? The fact is that after the civil war the whole country was in poverty and devastation, it was not at all until new inventions.
Historical facts
A variation of 32 caliber frolic appeared at a time when there was an urgent need for arming hunters engaged in fishing on a large scale. They did not trust them with military weapons, and there would be less sense from them than harm. And the converted samples worked by analogy with the standard smoothbore - accurate shooting at 40-50 meters with shot and up to 100 meters with a bullet.
For the first time, the converted versions of the technology under consideration began to be used by the British, who armed them with Indian police units. In the Russian Empire, such a practice was widely used after the decommissioning of the Berdan design from standard weapons. Some rifles were sent to state and private workshops to transform models into smooth-bore hunting modifications.
A similar task related to the need to provide hunters with suitable weapons arose after the Second World War. For this reason, most of the hunting variations of 1945-48 are redesigned Mosin rifles. As a rule, 32 caliber frolics were made single or double charged. However, there were also models for three cartridges.
Description
A standard rifle ammunition, expanded to fit a suitable caliber, is designed for the multi-charged version of the guns in question. Weapons stores of the 1981 release are considered the most suitable for alteration. This is due to the fact that they are assembled without the use of spot welding, on several rivets. The dismantled cheeks were leveled with a sledgehammer or a press, after which the ledges were fitted with elements fitted under the cartridge, drilled according to the template in the walls.
Then mounted elongated options, flared under the sweat. To expand the magazine part under 32 caliber, a welding method of installation was often used. The walls of the part were straightened on a wooden wedge, and the formation of the structure under the hunting cartridge was carried out “cheaply and cheerfully” (with a hammer and chisel).
Features
The 32-caliber hunting rifle was equipped with updated 1 mm thick sheet steel walls. These elements lack a classic cutout for a prong of reflective cutoff, as well as strips of profile ribs. Another solution to increase the magazine’s capacity is to bend the back of the trigger guard, which allows the magazine compartment to be lowered 5-10 mm down.
If a standard bed was used, the corresponding cut-out was elementarily expanded mechanically. On the covers of the feeding devices antisplash housings were fixed, fixed by riveting.
When creating a 32 gauge skirt, reflective cutters were also subjected to change. On pre-war samples, this element is almost always made in a single configuration. Debugging the ammunition feed slot in the standard style was done by removing the cutoff prong. Important factors for reliable cartridge feeding included the configuration and dimensions of the reflector spring. In the event that the charge was lifted upward, the situation exited by soldering a metal plate (by expanding the walls of the cartridge window with tin solder).
Sights
The 32-gauge Frolovka gun was equipped with a soldered hunting fly or imitation of a combat analog. In addition, the set of sights included a primitive pillar in the form of a slot in the transverse groove of the upper part of the breech trunk compartment. There are rare modifications in which the axial cut along the upper edge of the box acts as a pillar. He made the usual hacksaw.
In any case, the simplest aiming system on the guns of the type in question is considered the most convenient design. This is especially noticeable when firing "offhand." This is due to the underestimation of the sighting line, compared with the regular army mechanism. The shooting was carried out by filing or soldering the front sight in horizontal and vertical direction. This approach is fully justified, it gives the sighting device good characteristics, regardless of the guidance conditions of the weapon.
Characteristics of 32 caliber frolic after 1945
On post-war models, the stem boxes were redone in the groove area by removing them. Parts round in cross-section also did not have a dovetail calcaneal nest. In addition, the screw fixing the cutoff reflector was removed from the design. A milling niche for the ejector appeared on the right side of the wall to the right. This solution made it possible to facilitate the connection of the shutter after cleaning the weapon. The whole was regulated horizontally, located closer to the front of the trunk box. It has a semicircular slot, the configuration itself is similar to the identical version of modern Tula guns.
On the trunks of post-war modifications, according to available information, a shotgun design is provided. Such a configuration made it possible to simplify the technology for the production of smooth trunks with fitting elements to the box. Landing sockets for sight and front sight sectoral action were produced in the same configuration with the barrel. If an element of a different configuration was operated, the risk of “obstruction” of the sighting line increased significantly, due to the difference in the lengths and pitch of the thread.
To summarize
Along with some advantages, 20-gauge frolovka, like the 32nd version, had one significant drawback. He was in a weak ejector. The chamfering of the tooth of this element and the wear of the spring led to delays in the operation of the mechanism. With intensive use of weapons, a ramrod was required to push stuck shells.