Mossberg Patriots and AKs–SHOT Show

Mossberg has gone big for 2015.  They have 5(more than 5 really) new products that they launched at SHOT.  We spoke to Linda Powell about the Patriot line of rifles, check out the video for some details.  But what about the other 4?  Here is a brief summary of them.  Look for full reviews in the coming months.

Mossberg 1639


Mossberg has a brand new line of rimfire rifles called the Blaze.  These are super light weight rifles in 22 LR. There are 8 different rifles in the line.  There are black synthetic stocks and 3 different camo patters available.  Some models adjustable sights, some have a rail section on top and one model comes with a Dead Ringer Holographic Green Dot mounted and ready to go.  These will be offered with either a 10 or 25 round magazine. The Blaze 22s are a bit different than the competition in that the stock clam shells around the receiver.  The MSRP on these is around the $200 mark and they should be shipping now.  If you are in the market for a small, light weight rimfire, these are certainly worth a look.

Mossberg 1640

Blaze 47

Although these rifles share the same action as the Blaze, they look nothing alike.  Just as the name implies, these are AK-47-ish rifles.  They are chambered in 22 LR. There are 4 rifles in this line.  Two have faux wooden furniture and two are synthetic.  These come with either 10 or 25 round magazines.  One of the synthetic stock models has an AR style adjustable stock while the other one is fixed.  All models feature adjustable sights, 16.5″ barrels and weigh under 5 pounds. These are priced below $400.

L Series Shotguns

Are you a south paw?  Well, Mossberg has got some shotguns for you!  They have added 15 new shotguns for the left handed shooter.  These include models in the 500, 590 and 590a1 platforms.  There are tactical and sporting shotguns in the L Series line.  Prices look to be the same as the right handed models.

MVP Line Extensions

Mossberg has also added to the MVP line of rifles with  long range, scout and light chassis models.  If you are not familiar with the MVP line they are bolt action rifles that take AR magazines.  Check out our review of a MVP from last year for more information.

The bolt on the patriot.

The bolt on the patriot.

The complete Patriot line.

The complete Patriot line.

The booth at Mossberg is always a favorite. It is good to see the whole line in one place. Sensory overload.

The booth at Mossberg is always a favorite. It is good to see the whole line in one place. Sensory overload.

Another new addition is the Marble Arms sight is a great addition to the Mossberg turkey guns.

Another new addition is the Marble Arms sight is a great addition to the Mossberg turkey guns.


{ 26 comments… add one }
  • Dave June 24, 2016, 9:40 am

    So I bought a Mossberg MVP 308 with the ar15 retractable stock. It has two features that rock. The ar10/m1a magazine works perfectly. Second, a 308 with a 20″ barrel including the retractable stock is very good handling for a bolt gun. With the stock shortened a bit, it comes up fast.
    Now the bad, getting acceptable accuracy has been a challenge period. Only found one load that even comes close. Second, the crappy groved bolt is horrible. It was poorly done and grinds on the shell below it. I spent $25 on a gunsmith to smooth the bolt, and reblue it. Much better, still not totally smooth. Hey Mossberg, just make a smooth bolt, your bolt is total crap. I like the rest so much, I may have a quality barrel installed. It is a backup to my semis, just in case the gun grabbers get out of hand.

  • Raleigh Thomas May 26, 2015, 9:01 am

    An average AR will shoot rings around any AK ever made. Mine is an Adams Arms gas piston… the best of both worlds, EXTREMELY clean-shooting with no carbon-cake in the bolt carrier group, and 1MOA accurate with average good commercial ammo.
    HOWEVER, the AR I’m getting next, if I can find one, is the Stag Arms AR-47, an AR platform made to use standard AK 7.62 mags, in 7.62×39. The magazine has been the pitfall of previous 7.62 AR attempts, but the standard AK mags feed flawlessly. Now you can shoot 7.62×39 to the tune of < 2 MOA out to 300 yds. with hitting power way better than 5.56mm!

  • John Ballouz January 30, 2015, 3:34 pm

    Damn! My screed sited “Kivaari” not “KMacK”!
    It was “KMack” that I was agreeing with NOT “Kivaari”!!!
    “…don’t that make me look like an a**hole.” – Jack Nicholson

  • John January 30, 2015, 3:26 pm

    “Kivaari” is absolutely right.
    The rest of you are absolutely wrong.
    To wit: put a cheapo scope on a cheapo AK using cheapo ammo & you’ve got a 30 cal. rd in a platform that simply will NOT jam & you can actually hit stuff (consider: most FF are within 75 meters) out to 300 yds…& if the universe cooperates farther than that. Whoa, what a concept!
    Over in the “Sandbox” you need to be able to reach out farther & you have your DSM. What’s he shooting? 30 cal. Ask around. Ask if the 5.56 & the 9mm are “stoppers”. Ask.
    Viet Nam: ’68-69, B 1/4 3rd MarDiv, I Corps
    MOS 0331
    Eat it!

  • Steve January 30, 2015, 9:37 am

    Ruger 10-22, & Remington 552, there are no substitutes.

  • USPatriot January 27, 2015, 5:25 pm

    If you’re going to make an AK-47 version, don’t ruin it buy making it a wanabe .22 cal toy. The ONLY AK-47 worth anything is a 7.62x39mm or the 7.62x54mm caliber. This is no different than taking the Barrett .50 semi-auto and making it into a .22 caliber rat killer. SHAMEFUL! Very disappointed Mossberg!

    • Benjamin Reynolds January 29, 2015, 12:22 am

      Yeah I really only read this article because I thought they were talking about REAL AKs. At least Century Arms is producing American AKs in a serious caliber.

      • Steve January 30, 2015, 9:32 am

        Sure would be nice if American ammo manufacturers would get in the AK game.

        • Administrator January 30, 2015, 9:51 am

          Hornady makes a steel case round.

  • KMacK January 27, 2015, 4:46 pm

    I have to laugh. It seems that Kalashnikov’s carbine has taken first place as a desirable firearm…only nobody has told our military about it yet, The M-16 is and has been a source of trouble ever since it came out. It was “tested” for suitability as a
    combat arm by the Air Force, the only part of our military where it could have made a favorable impression. Eugene Stoner had a good idea but forgot that we grunts tend to get dirty, stay that way, and have minimal time to keep our weapons sparkling clean; and that is something the M-16 can’t handle: Dirt. It also really easy to lose a parts when you’re cleaning it in the field and if it isn’t clean it won’t work.
    If we’d adopted the Kalashnikov SYSTEM for our battle rifles, we would have lost far fewer people in Viet Nam to weapons jams and had fewer rifles “accidentally damaged” when not in combat (the buttstock crunches easily when a six-by backs over it).
    Seriously, the military needs to look at the Kalashnikov system, adopt it, and go to something other than a varmint round as a battle round, but it won’t happen. It’s cheaper to send “…with the thanks of a grateful nation” letters than it is to replace all the M-16 derived weapons in the service with something dependable.
    Yeah, I carried one of Stoner’s Boners in ‘Nam and had nothing but trouble with it. Lousy weapon, lousy round. Yeah, I’m bitter about it.

    • Kivaari January 27, 2015, 10:33 pm

      Most of what you say are faults and failures in the M16-type rifles and carbines is wrong. Comparing the 5.56mm to the 7.62mm M43 shows the 5.56mm is superior. Even the Soviets realized that and adopted a similar, but not equal, 5.45mm round 40 years ago. It is hard to undo the commonly accepted beliefs in the M16 failures. When you research the subject in professional documents, one finds the 5.56mm round is much better than its image carried forward since adopting the M16.
      You should read Ezell’s “The Great Rifle Controversy”. Then using the footnotes in that book, and Ezell’s “The AK47 Story” you will learn that most complaints about the M16 (now 50 years ago) were without foundation in reality.

      • Gregory Romeu January 28, 2015, 3:07 pm

        I would imagine that those with boots on the ground in so many recent wars over the past 14 years whose lives have relied on the M4 / M-16 rifle system might have a little more recent and valuable input on this subjest rather than reading books on or reviewing test results of the M-16 / M4.

        On a personal note? The AK-47 might be good if you like to “spray and pray” for your shot grouping, but when it comes to MY life? I will stand with and behind the M4.

    • Steve January 28, 2015, 7:18 am

      The round is a great round. As Kivaari explained, it’s so good the soviets made an attempt to mimic it. The rest of your complaints were fixed in the A-1 version or alleviated by proper oiling.

      Thank you for your service.

    • John January 28, 2015, 9:11 am

      AK47 strictly a short range assault rifle. Squared off with one using my Stag AR15 at 100 yards. Both had scopes. AK was no match. Son was totally embarrassed. Now wishes he had my AR.

    • Benjamin Reynolds January 29, 2015, 12:19 am

      The Vietnam issue rifles were beta tests. Yeah they sucked, but it more to do with the military leadership at the time than problems with the gun. The Army actually told soldiers the gun was “self cleaning” so they didn’t provide cleaning kits. The rounds were supposed to come preloaded in “disposable” magazines. Soldiers weren’t trained to properly handle full auto fire. These are the main reasons the rifles weren’t trusted in those early days. The rifle was a solid platform then and it is today. Many improvements have been made such as 855 A-1 ammo and many other modular changes to the M-16 which is currently an A-5. The AK-47 on the other hand has not evolved much from 1947 which isn’t a positive attribute. Granted it was ahead of its time and the 7.62 round had some advantages in thick jungle fighting but the gun is not good enough for U.S. service members of the 21st century.

    • mojo January 30, 2015, 8:52 pm

      Alot has been improved since the Name days. If I had my pick (and I do) I much rather carry the AR. Far better accuracy and quality has improved since the 60s and 70s. Plus with new optics like the Eotech and Meprolight the AR is the best rifle available. But the 70s weren’t all bad……….. they gave us disco!!

    • Michael February 1, 2015, 8:49 pm

      1971 – USMC – My first rifle was the M-14 (God I loved that rifle!). Then issued the M-16 (and later the M-16A1 and A2). Since I left the Corps have owned three different civilian versions. Every new updated version has been better than the previous one. Over my limited 45 years using this rifle platform, I have never had a single failure to feed, failure to fire, failure to extract, or failure to eject or failure to function in any way. Not a single one! Colts (military and civilian models), Bushmaster, and Stag – nada, none, never. None of my rifles are Vault Guns – they are all ready to go and shot regularly. I keep and have always kept my rifles clean and well-oiled (except before turning in my issue rifle to those danged anti-oil armorers!), and my ammo (quality, US manufactured) clean, cool, and dry. Now only use quality MagPul magazines. It is a good, solid platform without any of the problems originally plaguing it or its ammo from the early 60’s. However, having said all of this, I still prefer the M14 style, Springfield Armory M1A due to its ruggedness and .308 caliber.

  • BRASS January 27, 2015, 1:40 pm

    Why is everyone bringing out new guns in .22LR when you can’t find the ammo to buy, and if you do, it’s what center fire ammo cost before the shortage and gouging started, at least if you hand load. I’ve got a few boxes of Federal 555 copper washed 36 gr. I bought on sale for $8.88 ea., and a brick of Federal 40 gr. lubed LRN standard velocity that went for $7.50. I don’t expect those prices today but a brick of anything worth shooting is $30-45 and up, if you can find it. I understand the wars and raw materials prices drove up the cost but come on, who’s BSing who?
    It seems to me that Ruger or one of the other large firearms manufacturers might do themselves a favor and open a .22LR production line/facility to insure future sales of all their new .22LR firearms. I can load .223/5.56 for about 16 to 22 cents a round and 9MM for between 10 and 16 cents a round depending on bullets choices. Why would I pay 10 cents a round or more for .22 LR blasting ammo and 16 cents a round for target grade… of .22LR?

    • Rob62 January 27, 2015, 7:50 pm

      I totally agree. Somebody should look at starting a .22 RF (LR) manufacturing facility or seriously increasing their current line. The sheer number of .22 LR chambered firearms that are coming on the market is mind boggling. Where are folks that are purchasing all those guns going to get ammo from ?! I still don’t see any .22 LR at big box places such as Walmart. I don’t expect the days of “promo” 50rd boxes of .22 LR for 99 cents any more, but the demand for .22 LR is only increasing. Where is the increase in production we have been said is occurring?

  • Russ January 27, 2015, 11:08 am

    Strike 3 !

  • Mark January 27, 2015, 10:21 am

    Mossberg …

    Celebrity Reps (i.e., Duck Commander) and Bandwagon Marketing.

    Get back to Quality and Customer Service…

  • sharky January 27, 2015, 9:34 am

    I am afraid Mossberg has really “jumped the shark”. The guns they have come out with in the past several years are such bizarre desperate attempts to make money on gimmicks rather than substance. Remember their Bullpup shotgun? Huge potential there yet they come out with some crap recently with a chainsaw handle. wtf???!!

    I think all the Mossberg management has become addicted to meth and they are just trying to sell stupid products for that next quick “hit”.

    • Rob62 January 27, 2015, 7:44 pm

      I’m glad I am not the only one who thinks Mossberg is desperately trying to just get guns “out there”. They should stick with what they know, or used to know. Shotguns and basic .22 (bolt action) rifles. If they wanted to get into the bolt action center fire arena – there is LOTS of potential for someone to beat up Savage – however and it’s a BIG however. You have to produce an accurate, reliable, and not sloppily put together product. Savage right now, and for a long time has been the leader when it comes to getting it right for “budget” center fire bolt action rifles. C’mon fluted bolts and barrels on a “budget gun” that can’t shoot a group as well as Savage or Remington’s is just dumb. But hey, if it helps them sell more product, their marketing folks are getting it right at least.

  • Ted January 27, 2015, 8:59 am

    You know I really shopped their MVP hard in a .223 (mouse gun). I could not get over a friend’s .243 from them-sloppy action, not close to MOA (in all fairness-we’re still trying to hit the right hand load) and the stock screws when tightened actually touched the bolt so hard it froze the action. Plus: they had a full varminter (MVP) for just over $710 all in -scope, bipod, FFL clearance, etc. Minuses: perceived accuracy and real/perceived fit and finish. I punted and went with a Savage Axis-did the whole build for just under $650-sold the Savage stock that came with it and came in ~$600. Could not be happier with accuracy, appearance, etc. These folks may want to stick to shotguns-I’m not sure I want their rifles while they’re getting their game face.

  • walli1 January 27, 2015, 6:37 am

    They don’t support the guns they’ve come out with in the last couple years, why would I want to buy another one from them!

    • DEaler January 28, 2015, 10:31 pm

      We’ve had great service from Mossberg’s Eagle Pass, TX Warranty repair facility for years! Last year they repaired a Mod 930 shotgun that was three or more years old…free of charge!
      Did you send it in or get a run around?

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend