FBI Evidence Proves Oswald's Ammunition was not Capable of Sufficient Accuracy to Kill JFK

[John Lewis]

Sorry, you can quote all of the WC trolls you like but, this matter is well established in the shooting world, and the only people quoting the figures you are quoting are referred to as "disinfo agents".

Your level of debate seems to be degenerating to the level of the school yard, Sir. Your stock answer to everything is simply to call your opponent a liar and being on some sort of mission to discredit you. You have personally called me a liar when you state that my rifle does not have a .268" groove diameter.

You accuse me quoting 'trolls'. I take it then that Hornady are trolls who are simply out to discredit you - after all, they quote their bullet as being .267", not .268". I've measured mine and they are actually .2665, or thereabouts.

Is the person who wrote the article for the Mannlicher collectors association publication a troll? He quotes a rifle as having been personally measured by him as having a .269" groove diameter.

As to your assertion that all this is '...well established in the shooting world...', please see here

"Alll I can say is that I must be very lucky as I have two 6.5mm Mannlichers a Mdl 1892 and a Model 1903 both of which have groove sizes of 0.268" (which appears the norm) but bore sizes of 0.256". Now I have shot the express sighted (No3 Vee) Mdl 1892 to 200 yards using some old Kynoch factory 160 Grn Loads to check the sight regulation and using handloads with a variety of bullet weights from the Speer 120 grain , Speer 140 grain and Hornady 160 Grn RN with no problems using Reloader 19.

The 1903 has a brand new Steyr made barrel and yes it's also 0.268" groove diameter. I made a brass plug guage the has 0.001" increaments from 0.255"-0.260" and both are guaged at 0.256" bores. This 1903 shows excellent promise with the 120 grain Speers."

I take it that we can assume that the chap in question is one of your 'disinfo agents"?

From the same thread:

[TABLE="class: tableborders"]
[TR]
[TD="class: darktable"][/TD]
[TD="class: subjecttable"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: right"][TABLE="class: tablesurround"]
[TR]
[TD="class: navigation"] Edit[/TD]
[TD="class: navigation"] Reply[/TD]
[TD="class: navigation"] Quote[/TD]
[TD="class: navigation"] Quick Reply [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: lighttable"]To find out about the "problems" of the 6.5 Mannlicher, both 6.5x53R Mannlicher and the rimless 6.5x54 M-Sch, we have to go back to the early 1890s ballistic habits. At that time European cartridge designers still thought along the lines of black powder and lead bullets.As the early small bore bullets were rather thin-jacketed and -by today's standards- long and heavy for the caliber, and the early smokeless powders were fast burning, designers tended to use slightly undersize bullets and relied on the "slugging up" of the bullets on the sudden blow of pressure to fill the grooves. FI, this idea worked with the original 8x57 227gr .318" bullet to fill the .324" grooves, but not with lighter and stronger bullets. This lead to the confusion with .318" and .324" 8mm bullets.
The designer of the 6.5mm Mannlicher cartridges followed the same path of relying on "slugging up". On this forum you often read complains on the "outsize" groove diameter of Mannlicher-Schoenauer 6.5 mm barrels. If you take a look into the European CIP proof tables, you will find a minimum groove diameter of 6.78mm = surprise! .2669", the minimum bore diameter is 6.48mm = .255", so the minimum barrel diameters are both .03mm = .0012" wider than prescribed for the other 6.5mm cartridges like 6.5x55, 6.5x57, 6.5x68.
The maximum bullet diameter is the same for these "6.5mm" cartridges, 6.70mm = .264".
For the sake of "science" I have torn apart some original cartridges and miked the bullets:
Hornady 160gr round nose: .264"
1928 Portuguese military 158gr fmj/solid round nose: .263"
RWS, both pre- and post-WW2 make, 159gr TMR/round nose soft point: .261"!
RWS 159gr prewar H-jacketed boat-tail hollow-point .261" also.
Apparently most Mannlicher-Schoenauers did not shoot too bad with these "grossly undersized" bullets. So I dare to recommend for old M-Sch rifles:
do not try light bullets below 140gr
do not try hard bullets like Noslers or even homogenous bullets.
As M1903 Mannlicher-Schoenauer magazines, other than the post-war models, guide the cartridges at the base and at the bullet tip, feeding is most reliable with round noses seated to maximum cartridge length."




[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Just for sake of pure accuracy, you say you provided a link to the CIP and that is not what is contained in the above post, if that is what you refer to. You provided a link to a forum where someone discusses the CIP. Did I miss your link to the actual CIP data?

The CiP website isn't very intuitive.

http://www.cip-bobp.org/homologation/en/tdcc_public

The links are in post 107, under the words 'here'.

I agree, the CiP website is pretty rubbish.

JL.