My boxes of PPU/PRVI showed up today. Box is labeled .264, so I won't expect the world out of them. Hopefully I can reuse the brass and add it to the .268 cast Jet bullets I got a ship notification for today. Now I am just waiting impatiently for my enbloc clips to show up (last tracking had them 3 provinces away...) and I can play
6.5x52 Carcano Ammo
- Thread starter dariush49
- Start date
I got 4 brass clips on ebay shipped up from the US.....they were eek I think $50USD for 4
Otherwise i have heard some dealers have some on order but not actually seen more.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/ORIGINAL-ITALIAN-CARCANO-BRASS-STRIPPER-CLIPS-6-ROUNDS-SET-OF-4-PIECES/193670116997?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2648
Those might actually have the 268 diameter bullets.
If memory serves, Norma still produces the 268 diameter bullets.
Just for curiosity, looked on the Norma and Privi sites.
Both used to produce the .268 diameter bullets but now, neither do. Maybe every few years they will make up runs???
Last edited:
I bought a few from Numrich in the states, I think about $6usd each. Corwin says they have a line on some surplus ones and they should be in *soon*ish. Marstar is having a batch newly manufactured, but no firm ETA other than soon-ish as well.
Eaglelord17
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Sault Ste. Marie
Most are 300m
Carcano is NOT a difficult round to load for IF you understand the basics of WHAT they were doing and WHY.
I went the other direction when building loads for my raft of Carcani.
I reasoned that the original Italian loading used a 163-grain bullet of .266" diameter, on top of 30.04 grains of an energetic double-based flake powder. Those figures are from the 1908 Text Book of Ammunition.
At the time, all I had were Remington bulk-pack 140 PSP slugs; my Hornady .268s had been on back-order for 4 years and still no sign of them.
My reasoning was that the Italians had no troubles with their rifles as to accuracy and their barrel dimensions, especially in wartime, were all over the map. I had some Norse Norma slugs and they, also, were all over the map! It would have been nicer had they been on the paper once in a while.
I settled on a loading of 28 grains of IMR-4198 to give the Remington flat-base slugs a good swift kick on the fundament, then headed for the range. My nice new-condition Model 41 put them under an inch. So did the 1917 Marksman's rifle. So did a 1918 Model 91. My Model 38 6.5mm CARBINE even started shooting quite well (for something with a sighting radius a bit longer than a dollar bill). And, with the Carbine, GONE was that Gawd-awful muzzle blast, fireball and ear-splitting report. The Carbine, which I had dreaded trying (having shot it with Western military Ball ammo) became docile and accurate!
With those results, I have stuck with that load. It likely is a touch under MilSpec but my scrawny 76-year-old shoulders do appreciate the absence of kick and my ears (partly wrecked from an argument with a Firefly many years ago) appreciate the moderate report. I would recommend it for any rifle in decent condition.
.......................... ............................. ................................
I see many comments as to the fit and finish of Carcanos, especially those specimens built during the Second War. What people fail to understand is that building a rifle which WORKS is only half the job when time and money are concerned; making it pretty costs just as much. My Marksman's rifle was a very nice rifle 103 years ago, enough so that original (protected) finish remaining is still awfully nice, pretty much the equal of anything else from the period. My 1941 model also is very nice and my Armaguerra, despite being an actual battlefield pickup, was just as good as a Garand or Number 4 of the same period. MUCH of the time, however, Italy needed RIFLES much more than they needed PRETTY rifles, so they put what money they had into building rifles which WORKED. They were LOSING a World War and doing it in their own back yard; I think it forgiveable that their 1943 rifles came out to much the standard of a German 1945 rifle. They had a good mechanism and a decent cartridge, so those are what they produced.
If you want to UNDERSTAND what you have, first you must understand the HISTORICAL CONTEXT in which it was built. When they had the time and the money, could the Italians build a pretty rifle? My 1892 Vetterli-Vitali (VV1870/87/915) model TS bears 1938 rebuild markings and it is plain GORGEOUS! It ALSO has not been kicked from one end of North Africa to the other!
I went the other direction when building loads for my raft of Carcani.
I reasoned that the original Italian loading used a 163-grain bullet of .266" diameter, on top of 30.04 grains of an energetic double-based flake powder. Those figures are from the 1908 Text Book of Ammunition.
At the time, all I had were Remington bulk-pack 140 PSP slugs; my Hornady .268s had been on back-order for 4 years and still no sign of them.
My reasoning was that the Italians had no troubles with their rifles as to accuracy and their barrel dimensions, especially in wartime, were all over the map. I had some Norse Norma slugs and they, also, were all over the map! It would have been nicer had they been on the paper once in a while.
I settled on a loading of 28 grains of IMR-4198 to give the Remington flat-base slugs a good swift kick on the fundament, then headed for the range. My nice new-condition Model 41 put them under an inch. So did the 1917 Marksman's rifle. So did a 1918 Model 91. My Model 38 6.5mm CARBINE even started shooting quite well (for something with a sighting radius a bit longer than a dollar bill). And, with the Carbine, GONE was that Gawd-awful muzzle blast, fireball and ear-splitting report. The Carbine, which I had dreaded trying (having shot it with Western military Ball ammo) became docile and accurate!
With those results, I have stuck with that load. It likely is a touch under MilSpec but my scrawny 76-year-old shoulders do appreciate the absence of kick and my ears (partly wrecked from an argument with a Firefly many years ago) appreciate the moderate report. I would recommend it for any rifle in decent condition.
.......................... ............................. ................................
I see many comments as to the fit and finish of Carcanos, especially those specimens built during the Second War. What people fail to understand is that building a rifle which WORKS is only half the job when time and money are concerned; making it pretty costs just as much. My Marksman's rifle was a very nice rifle 103 years ago, enough so that original (protected) finish remaining is still awfully nice, pretty much the equal of anything else from the period. My 1941 model also is very nice and my Armaguerra, despite being an actual battlefield pickup, was just as good as a Garand or Number 4 of the same period. MUCH of the time, however, Italy needed RIFLES much more than they needed PRETTY rifles, so they put what money they had into building rifles which WORKED. They were LOSING a World War and doing it in their own back yard; I think it forgiveable that their 1943 rifles came out to much the standard of a German 1945 rifle. They had a good mechanism and a decent cartridge, so those are what they produced.
If you want to UNDERSTAND what you have, first you must understand the HISTORICAL CONTEXT in which it was built. When they had the time and the money, could the Italians build a pretty rifle? My 1892 Vetterli-Vitali (VV1870/87/915) model TS bears 1938 rebuild markings and it is plain GORGEOUS! It ALSO has not been kicked from one end of North Africa to the other!
Smellie, your post just reminded me of the round nose, 160 grain Swede surplus bullets, with the exposed lead bases, that were once available and cheap. They had cupro nickel jackets, which were quite malleable.
I used to shoot these out the the now gone Carcanos I owned, chambered for the 6.5x52.
Back in the day a bunch of surplus 6.5x52 Carcano ammunition came into International Firearms out of Montreal. It came out of Finland with a bunch of other surplus ammunition back in the late seventies. It wasn't very reliable ammo. Lots of Verdigris on the cases and in the twelve round boxes. It was all on six round enblocs and pretty much a mess. I just happened to be Johnny on the spot and was offered the 12k lot of ammo in wood crates, if I would take it with me when I left. Of course, I complied.
I washed it all in a bath of Sunlight detergent, laced with vinegar. It all came out bright and shiny but the corrosion had gone to far. Even for me, the cases and primers were to badly scored to want to attempt to shoot it.
I pulled every one of those bullets and salvaged the powder, which fits the description of the original powder you described from the 1908 Text Book of Ammunition.
Much of the ammunition, back at the time that book was written, was a clone of the original Rottweil, double base, flake powder that was used to replace Black Powder. Rotweil licensed all sorts of nations to produce this powder and Italy was one of them.
You're right, that powder is fast. It was first produced for cartridges with large diameter, heavy lead bullets, then along came France, using a very similar powder and loaded it in their very good 8mm Lebel around 1886 and used the same powder all through WWI, into the twenties. Why change it, if it isn't broken.
Anyway, I sold off all of the bullets long ago, but I still have the powder from those old Finn cases. It's great in cartridges like the 45 Long Colt and 455 Webley and even the 380 Webley Short.
What I did back then, because 6.5x52 was always difficult to come by in shootable lots or decent condition, was load up this double base flake powder to the same load of 30.4 grains, which was the average weight of the charges from the scrapped cases.
This load performed very well out of my rifles. The exposed lead bases were pushed up into the jackets, forcing them to obturate enough to fill the grooves. Which is exactly what you were doing with the Remington flat base bullets.
I used to shoot these out the the now gone Carcanos I owned, chambered for the 6.5x52.
Back in the day a bunch of surplus 6.5x52 Carcano ammunition came into International Firearms out of Montreal. It came out of Finland with a bunch of other surplus ammunition back in the late seventies. It wasn't very reliable ammo. Lots of Verdigris on the cases and in the twelve round boxes. It was all on six round enblocs and pretty much a mess. I just happened to be Johnny on the spot and was offered the 12k lot of ammo in wood crates, if I would take it with me when I left. Of course, I complied.
I washed it all in a bath of Sunlight detergent, laced with vinegar. It all came out bright and shiny but the corrosion had gone to far. Even for me, the cases and primers were to badly scored to want to attempt to shoot it.
I pulled every one of those bullets and salvaged the powder, which fits the description of the original powder you described from the 1908 Text Book of Ammunition.
Much of the ammunition, back at the time that book was written, was a clone of the original Rottweil, double base, flake powder that was used to replace Black Powder. Rotweil licensed all sorts of nations to produce this powder and Italy was one of them.
You're right, that powder is fast. It was first produced for cartridges with large diameter, heavy lead bullets, then along came France, using a very similar powder and loaded it in their very good 8mm Lebel around 1886 and used the same powder all through WWI, into the twenties. Why change it, if it isn't broken.
Anyway, I sold off all of the bullets long ago, but I still have the powder from those old Finn cases. It's great in cartridges like the 45 Long Colt and 455 Webley and even the 380 Webley Short.
What I did back then, because 6.5x52 was always difficult to come by in shootable lots or decent condition, was load up this double base flake powder to the same load of 30.4 grains, which was the average weight of the charges from the scrapped cases.
This load performed very well out of my rifles. The exposed lead bases were pushed up into the jackets, forcing them to obturate enough to fill the grooves. Which is exactly what you were doing with the Remington flat base bullets.
Couple boxes listed on Switzer's Auction site. Norma sporting ammo I think. Getting close to 40 bucks now. Buyers premium and tax would be on top of that. I have 3 Carcanos and some brass. Might have time to do some serious cast load development this summer. Both my 6.5 moulds cast at about .266. Powder coating which I have never done might be the answer in getting them a little bigger
