Carcano shooting

Andy said:
That's part of it. Do you then hold at 6 o'clock or on the centre? Or do you line all three up (on the red dot in these crude pics)?

View attachment 645889
Click to expand...

Andy with factory military ammo at 100m, you would use sight picture on the left, and even with that picture, you will hit high.

With slower moving reloads, you'll need to experiment.

Italian soldiers would use the picture on the left, but with the blade level with the top of the V. They would aim at the belt and expect to get a chest hit at 100m.
 
here is what i am using. NOE bullets,
270 145Gr and 163Gr
I don't have a lube sizer, so only alox lube my bullets. the 163Gr were shooting good, size to .269. haven't tried the 145Gr yet. have to load some of those up and hope for some nicer temps...

20230108-102220-2.jpg
 
dakotamar said:
here is what i am using. NOE bullets,
270 145Gr and 163Gr
I don't have a lube sizer, so only alox lube my bullets. the 163Gr were shooting good, size to .269. haven't tried the 145Gr yet. have to load some of those up and hope for some nicer temps...

20230108-102220-2.jpg
Click to expand...

What powders and loads are you considering?
 
mbogo3 said:
Not according to it's performance on the locals in North Africa. Never heard the Boers complain though.
Click to expand...

Maybe the Boers were better shots than the Italians, or maybe the North Africans were high on Quat (sp?) Like it's claimed for the American Philippines Campaign.

Or maybe the Italians planned on going to the 7.35 because they couldn't make a 6.5 tracer. Or maybe they wanted to be able to rebore the several million 6.5 rifles they had.

I have my doubts that 11 grains more bullet weight and less than .02" more bullet diameter, at a lower velocity to boot made any difference at all.
 
Some info on the M91 Cavalry barrel and its twist.

I've seen a few variations on the specs for the gain twist barrels found on the M91 Cavalry rifles we've been discussing, so I went to an Italian site to try to get closer to the "source", and used an Italian to English Translator to glean some info for us:

Barrel Length - 451 mm - 17.76"

Rifled Length - 375 mm - 14.76"

Four grooves Right Hand Twist

Twist at chamber end - 38.96 cm - 15.34" 3 degree inclination

Twist at muzzle end - 19.00 cm - 7.48", 6 degree inclination

I suspect that the variations seen from English sources are the result of a combination of metric illiteracy and rounding.

Some say that gain twist was used to increase barrel life and others to decrease pressure. I suppose with respect to "peak" pressure it might do that, but the act of continuously changing the engraving on the bullet would seem to increase resistance throughout barrel travel, and hence would seen to increase "average Pressure", whereas with standard rifling, once the bullet is engraved, it would "ride the lands" to the muzzle.

Snapshot 1 (1-12-2023 8-43 AM).jpg

Here's a crude video (sorry), in which you can see the change in twist from chamber to muzzle. I'd celebrate a better video being shared. ;)

https://imgur.com/7WH0v6y
 

Attachments

  • Snapshot 1 (1-12-2023 8-43 AM).jpg
    Snapshot 1 (1-12-2023 8-43 AM).jpg
    8.8 KB · Views: 102
Last edited:
Initial pressure is substantially decreased. Overall pressure is also less than if the barrel was just the end twist rate.

Think of it like a manual car, which is easier on the engine dumping the clutch straight into gear or slowly engaging it? Progressive rifling is slowly engaging it, standard rifling is dumping the clutch.
 
Eaglelord17 said:
Initial pressure is substantially decreased. Overall pressure is also less than if the barrel was just the end twist rate.

Think of it like a manual car, which is easier on the engine dumping the clutch straight into gear or slowly engaging it? Progressive rifling is slowly engaging it, standard rifling is dumping the clutch.
Click to expand...

That's theoretically the case, but the Italians eventually conceded there was not enough tangible benefit and reverted to standard rifling on the m41 in 6.5 and all of the 7.35 variants.
 
They also changed powders. I'm in the camp that it was to decrease peak pressure with what seems to have been a fast powder.
 
MiG25 said:
They also changed powders. I'm in the camp that it was to decrease peak pressure with what seems to have been a fast powder.
Click to expand...

I think all Italian rifles were green lit to shoot any infantry ammo in stores. M41's didn't get different ammo than other guns on the battlefield.
 
MiG25 said:
I believe the original powder, Ballistite, was replaced well before WWI.
Click to expand...

Yes, but they made progressive rifling versions of the carcano at all factories until 1941, and in half of them to the end of the war. Even new factories opened in the 1930's used progressive rifling.

If it were only for ballistite, they would have not bothered with fancy rifling when setting up new production lines.
 
Claven2 said:
Yes, but they made progressive rifling versions of the carcano at all factories until 1941, and in half of them to the end of the war. Even new factories opened in the 1930's used progressive rifling.

If it were only for ballistite, they would have not bothered with fancy rifling when setting up new production lines.
Click to expand...

You may be giving the Govt and Bureaucracy too much credit. Why does the 1903A3 made by a typewriter company have a magazine cut off?
 
Took my newest Carcano to the range today to confirm that, like my first one, it is zero'd for ~300 yards. Shooting at poster paper at 100 yards, from my elbows on the bench. 143gr cast Jet Bullets (.268) over 10.0gr Unique. Holding the sights like a modern rifle (front post level with the top of the rear notch) I put 12 rounds high (by about 7") and left (by about 3"). The entire 12 shot group was about 7" round. So I'll be building up the front sight like I did on my other rifle with JB weld and then I'll sand it down so my POA and POI are the same

Other issues? I often get 6th round jams on both Carcanos. The round is forced forward along with the clip and then jam up tight. Not sure if the issue just comes from the repro clips or something else. Also, neither carcano seems to eject well unless I run the bolt back with some real force. This time of year I don't like to do that or else the brass ejects too far and I'm bound to lose it in the snow
 
I measured the muzzle bore diameter on a friend's rifle this morning.

The rifle was in 85% condition inside and out. Overall, a very nice milsurp. No visible rust at all. Very few stock dings or blue wear and no stock cracks.

The land diameter was .262 in and the groove diameter was .273 in.

If it were my rifle, I would shoot .277 in diameter, 130 grain bullets out of it, over 25.0 grains of IMR4064, developed and available commercially around 1935 , very closely resembling the powder used in the 6.5x52 at that time, over CCI250 primers.

PO Ackley proved these actions are very strong and the Italians loaded them to pressures their troops found reasonably comfortable for their stature, not for pressure concerns as most people think.

They will easily handle the pressures generated with the above load. I've used that same combo in several M91 and M91/38 rifles with very decent accuracy and zero mishaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom