The Side Mounted Scope on the 6.5 mm Carcano

[Bob Prudhomme]

bump

[Drew Phipps]

Does the muzzle velocity of the smaller WC bullet decrease, and if so by how much? My high school physics tells me that the force on a bullet should be proportional to the surface area of the bullet exposed to the explosive gases. A .264 caliber bullet would have about 97% of the surface area of a .268 caliber bullet. Is the muzzle velocity 97% less too?

I ask because the "magic bullet theory" has some pretty tight contraints on the velocity of the bullet. If it's too slow to begin with, you might fall outside the range of velocities that are medically required to produce the observed injuries.

[Drew Phipps]

Bob: You have also stated in another thread how you would go about breaking apart and reloading the round to remove the 20 year-old gunpowder and make the bullet more accurate. So that could have been done to the ammo in this case. Furthermore, the shell casings found at the "snipers nest" scene bore marks that indicated that they had previously been chambered in more than one rifle, since the marks were different. This all seems to indicate the possibility that the ammo had been reloaded.

We don't know where Oswald might have purchased ammo, since the FBI never uncovered any evidence he purchased any, and since he didn't have any (anywhere), with the possible exception of the one left in the gun. There are stories of an "Oswald look-alike" firing at a target range and making the point of recovering his brass. Doesn't this all make a reloading scenario more likely?

Note: The reloading scenario does make it less likely that Oswald was involved, since in addition to him not having any ammo, none of the necessary equipment needed to reload ammo was found among his possessions.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Bob: You have also stated in another thread how you would go about breaking apart and reloading the round to remove the 20 year-old gunpowder and make the bullet more accurate. So that could have been done to the ammo in this case. Furthermore, the shell casings found at the "snipers nest" scene bore marks that indicated that they had previously been chambered in more than one rifle, since the marks were different. This all seems to indicate the possibility that the ammo had been reloaded.

We don't know where Oswald might have purchased ammo, since the FBI never uncovered any evidence he purchased any, and since he didn't have any (anywhere), with the possible exception of the one left in the gun. There are stories of an "Oswald look-alike" firing at a target range and making the point of recovering his brass. Doesn't this all make a reloading scenario more likely?

Note: The reloading scenario does make it less likely that Oswald was involved, since in addition to him not having any ammo, none of the necessary equipment needed to reload ammo was found among his possessions.

Actually, it would be more like 60 or 70 year old gunpowder (and primers) at this point in time. I'm not sure how anyone could seriously say they were doing accuracy tests with ammunition this old.

Any time you see a guy at a range carefully collecting all of his empty casings, you are looking at either a handloader or a guy with a good place to peddle scrap metal.

Once again, it is entirely possible that cartridges were handloaded for the M91/38; not just to get the properly sized .268" bullet into the casing but also for the improved accuracy handloading lends to shooting. However, considering all of the other inadequacies of the rifle, it hardly seems worth the effort.

[Drew Phipps]

Would have been 20 year old ammo at the time.

A handloader that looks like Oswald explains rather a lot, imho. The appearances at the range, the stories of "Oswald" driving a car, the "two Oswalds" arrested at the Texas theater, and Oswald leaving the JFK scene in a city bus and also in a Rambler, the fornsic differences between the recovered bullet bits and the alleged weapon, the lack of ammo in Oswald's possession, the rechambering marks on the spent casings, and possibly even the single most important anomaly in the whole case, if Harold Weisberg recalls local Dallas history and the FBI investigation correctly.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Would have been 20 year old ammo at the time.

A handloader that looks like Oswald explains rather a lot, imho. The appearances at the range, the stories of "Oswald" driving a car, the "two Oswalds" arrested at the Texas theater, and Oswald leaving the JFK scene in a city bus and also in a Rambler, the fornsic differences between the recovered bullet bits and the alleged weapon, the lack of ammo in Oswald's possession, the rechambering marks on the spent casings, and possibly even the single most important anomaly in the whole case, if Harold Weisberg recalls local Dallas history and the FBI investigation correctly.

I see what you mean now about 20 year old ammunition. For some reason, I thought we were discussing the recreation shooting tests done a few years ago.

Oswald sure seems to have gotten around in the period prior to the assassination. Refresh my memory on the anomaly of Weisberg's.

[Drew Phipps]

Does the muzzle velocity of the smaller WC bullet decrease, and if so by how much? My high school physics tells me that the force on a bullet should be proportional to the surface area of the bullet exposed to the explosive gases. A .264 caliber bullet would have about 97% of the surface area of a .268 caliber bullet. Is the muzzle velocity 97% too?

I ask because the "magic bullet theory" has some pretty tight contraints on the velocity of the bullet. If it's too slow to begin with, you might fall outside the range of velocities that are medically required to produce the observed injuries.

Any ideas about how much muzzle velocity would differ for the smaller ammo?

[Bob Prudhomme]

Does the muzzle velocity of the smaller WC bullet decrease, and if so by how much? My high school physics tells me that the force on a bullet should be proportional to the surface area of the bullet exposed to the explosive gases. A .264 caliber bullet would have about 97% of the surface area of a .268 caliber bullet. Is the muzzle velocity 97% too?

I ask because the "magic bullet theory" has some pretty tight contraints on the velocity of the bullet. If it's too slow to begin with, you might fall outside the range of velocities that are medically required to produce the observed injuries.

Any ideas about how much muzzle velocity would differ for the smaller ammo?

I don't believe there would be very much difference in muzzle velocity due simply to the diametrical difference between the two bullets. If anything, the smaller bullet would have less drag due to decreased wind resistance, although a difference of .004" might make this difference in drag hard to measure.

As the undersized bullet would not completely fill the .268" grooves of the Carcano rifle, it is entirely possible that propellant gases could blow by the bullet as it travels through the barrel. This could have a tremendous effect on muzzle velocity.

[Bob Prudhomme]

I found something interesting about the Ordnance Optics 4 x 18 scope that was mounted on the Carcano found on the 6th floor of the TSBD.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

slam-fire

11-13-2008, 02:12 AM

Okay guys, here's the complete story (as best I know) on the Ordnance Optics Scopes.

When Ordnance Optics went out of business, we (Martin B. Retting, Inc.) bought their remaining inventory of 4x scopes. From what I hear...it was a pretty big lot and the scopes were such poor quality that Jim Thompson (who was the mgr. at the time and responsible for the purchase) never heard the end of it.

For while the scopes were sold on the floor for use with .22 rifles, I think they were under $10.00 in the late 70's. I remember buying one as a kid for my 10/22.

Their more infamous role came when one of the scopes that we sold Kline's ended up on a certain Carcano.

Here are the fact as I know them to be:

a) there was only one lot of scopes sold off by Ordnance Optics....but there were two slight variations within it. The one on Oswald's rifle had a knurled ocular lens bell housing. The remaining scopes have smooth ocular bell housings. Otherwise the markings are the same.

b) there is only one type of mount, both the 3 hole and 4 hole started out the same. some mounts were ground to fit 95 mausers (in order to clear the bolt stop). the carcano should have had a four hole mount, with no need for grinding...but Kline's had both styles and simply installed the wrong one.

c) the best photo of the rifle, for reference of the scope and mount, appears in the November, 1983 issue of Life Magazine. A photographer was allowed access to the Oswald rifle...the resulting photos show much more detail than the Warren commission pics.

d) the scopes themselves are horrible....very poor optically....very frail crosshairs! In addition, the crosshairs are not self centering, so depending on the rifle, the sight picture may be a little annoying. The mounts are also prone to bending. If I had to vote, I go along with the school of thought that argues that Oswald either used the iron sights or simply pointed the rifle by looking over the scope.

that being said, I have a few left...the price is $250.00 with mounts, plus $20.00 if you want Keith (the guy who as a kid, ground them originally) to grind the mount like the 95 mount. the actual availability issue isn't the scopes, it's the mounts..... which will run out before the scopes.

I used to advertise them occasionally, with a brief history and a certificate of authenticity, but I got tired of all of the hate mail that I would get... never ceases to amaze me how mean supposedly "enlightened" liberals can be if you're what they consider "politically incorrect"

anyhow.... if anyone ever has any question, you can call me at the shop. 310-***-****....ask for Alex

[Bob Prudhomme]

Wow, the price definitely went up over 51 years.