Carcano shooting

Some useful info:

Ppu 123gn soft points: .264" exactly in average. I just measured 10 rounds from 3 different boxes.

Ppu 139gn fmjbt's sold as .268 actually average .267". I averaged 10 projectiles, all within half a thou of each other.

6.5 Swedish milsurp = .264", I just measured and averaged the 5 rounds I have, mixed headstamps, all 1940's stuff.

The Hornaday 6.5 carcano .268" 160gn rnsp bullet measures .267" in reality.
 
Back in the day, I used a damaged .243Win sizing die to swage .277 bullets to .270in diameter to shoot out of a Japanese Type I rifle, which is an Italian Carcano action, modified to take the Arisaka magazine and the 6.5x50 cartridge.

A lot of Japanese rifles with 6.5 bores are oversized, and up to .270 in diameter. My Type I, has a .269 bore diameter.

I also shot some of those swaged bullets through a couple of M91 Carcano full length rifles with exc bores but around .270 diameter.

I used my Rock Chucker press with a special holder on the mandrel rod to push the heavily lubed bullets up through the neck portion of the die. This is tedious and requires a bit of an extension to the press lever handle to make it all happen smoothly in one pass.

These slightly oversize bullets shot very well out of all three rifles I loaded and shot them in. I used middle of the road loads to start and worked up loads for accuracy.

It's easy and simple with 130 grain bullets and gets more difficult as the length/weight of the bullets increases.

I quit swaging these bullets well over a decade back, so don't ask for any. Do it yourself and see how it turns out. Good grease for lube is crucial to good results.
 
Paul_T said:
139 or 123? I have 2 boxes of PPU 123 here marked 0.264 on the box. They mic out from 0.263 to 0.2365
Click to expand...

Both


I forgot that I posted earlier, so I took some quick pics on my way out of the house. But the micrometer will tell the same story.


wawk4dE.jpg


VfxWRON.jpg
 
Dyspnea said:
Both


I forgot that I posted earlier, so I took some quick pics on my way out of the house. But the micrometer will tell the same story.


wawk4dE.jpg


VfxWRON.jpg
Click to expand...

What is the batch number in your box flaps? My 123gn sp ppu ammo mics out .264. I don't have any fmjbt factory ammo to measure.
 
Claven2 said:
What is the batch number in your box flaps? My 123gn sp ppu ammo mics out .264. I don't have any fmjbt factory ammo to measure.
Click to expand...

I’ll have to get back to you in 12 hrs, back on shift. But I bought the ammo at the time theses cavalry rifles were imported into Canada. I bought the rifle from wolverine and pretty sure I got the ammo from them too, not blaming wolverine they would have had no idea.
 
Maybe they changed it in production. My lot number is identical on the 3 boxes I have at present. Lot P-21001, inspection stamp 201. Definitely .264".

p8A5MVC.jpg
 
Personally wouldn’t buy any Carcano ammo unless I could mic a few rounds in person. Maybe Ppu has improved their standards since I purchased, but it has definitely made me reconsider any future ammo from ppu.
 
Dyspnea said:
Personally wouldn’t buy any Carcano ammo unless I could mic a few rounds in person. Maybe Ppu has improved their standards since I purchased, but it has definitely made me reconsider any future ammo from ppu.
Click to expand...

well the box design has definitely changed, and the stuff I bought was just last month (from Marstar). It would appear they have changed the bullet they are using to one of slightly greater diameter - a good thing.

I notice your boxes do not list the diameter on the box like mine do.
 
Claven2 said:
well the box design has definitely changed, and the stuff I bought was just last month (from Marstar). It would appear they have changed the bullet they are using to one of slightly greater diameter - a good thing.

I notice your boxes do not list the diameter on the box like mine do.
Click to expand...

I have the exact same box design but fmj bt 139gr box says .264 but each bullet measures .261.5
 
Here is my conspiracy theory.

My guess is importers when they got their hands on these cavalry carbines, knew they wouldn’t sell well (which ever country they went too) without ammo to go along. So they looked and asked around and PPU was the only willing, low cost enough or had the production capacity available. Then PPU either started the production run with .263/.264 (or never even had) and ran out proper projectiles before the order number was reached and switched a different projectiles due to supply chain issues. They knew that using .260/.261 projectiles would work (poorly) with no adverse effects.

Even if I’m wrong it’s still points to poor quality control.
 
Dyspnea said:
Here is my conspiracy theory.

My guess is importers when they got their hands on these cavalry carbines, knew they wouldn’t sell well (which ever country they went too) without ammo to go along. So they looked and asked around and PPU was the only willing, low cost enough or had the production capacity available. Then PPU either started the production run with .263/.264 (or never even had) and ran out proper projectiles before the order number was reached and switched a different projectiles due to supply chain issues. They knew that using .260/.261 projectiles would work (poorly) with no adverse effects.

Even if I’m wrong it’s still points to poor quality control.
Click to expand...

I think it's the opposite. The ammo currently shipping is .264 and the stuff a year or more ago was not. If anything they used what they had on hand until they could get .264 and .267 bullets up and running. I think the "21" in P-21001 is likely 2021. These current carbines started showing up in US and Canada in 2020 and before that, Royal Tiger Imports brought tens of thousands in from Ethiopia starting in late 2019.
 
Dyspnea said:
Personally wouldn’t buy any Carcano ammo unless I could mic a few rounds in person. Maybe Ppu has improved their standards since I purchased, but it has definitely made me reconsider any future ammo from ppu.
Click to expand...

That means you are stuck with corrosive milsurp, often of dubious quality, especially when you consider the nations the cartridges are coming from
 
This thread is chock full of good information.

One thing I see lacking is personal innovation.

You folks are trying to fix an unfixable issue with ''off the shelf components'' It isn't going to work, no matter how much you want it to.

You can make up a crude but effective swaging system easily that utilizes your single stage press if you have one, and off the shelf .277 bullets or use a smaller die, such as a .223 and have a machinist turn out the neck diameter to your ideal diameter and swage the same bullets

The folks that originally built those rifles used simple cup and core constructed bullets of varying diameters, with EXPOSED LEAD BASES to take care of all the issues being flogged to death here, trying to make a miracle happen.

When the rifles and cartridges were originally assembled, accuracy requirements were minute of man at a specified difference, other than a few nations, such as Finland, Germany and Belgium.

Right into the mid fifties, four minutes of angle was considered to be acceptable for hunting accuracy.

Things have changed since then, a lot.

You aren't dealing with modern/precision technology when you're shooting Carcano rifles. You're dealing with 135 year old tech and the way they dealt with any discrepencies.

You can try to apply present day tech, but why????? The problem was solved a long time ago as far as the Italians and those using the Carcano type rifles were concerned. Use their tech.
 
Swaging jacketed bullets from .277 to .268 has been tried. It will get you shooting, but most report poor accuracy as they tend to swage unpredictably from bullet to bullet. That's a lot to squeeze down by.

My money is on gas checked cast with wheel weight, but we'll see if I'm right or not.
 
contact148 said:
I have the exact same box design but fmj bt 139gr box says .264 but each bullet measures .261.5
Click to expand...
That's for a seated bullet. Is it possible that the diameter is larger within the neck? I doubt it, but it's worth checking.

Could be poor QA, but I imagine they are that small to ensure there are no pressure issues.
 
Andy said:
That's for a seated bullet. Is it possible that the diameter is larger within the neck? I doubt it, but it's worth checking.

Could be poor QA, but I imagine they are that small to ensure there are no pressure issues.
Click to expand...

correct I was only able to acquire 1 box so i won't be pulling any as I don't have dies (yet) to reseat
 
Claven2 said:
Swaging jacketed bullets from .277 to .268 has been tried. It will get you shooting, but most report poor accuracy as they tend to swage unpredictably from bullet to bullet. That's a lot to squeeze down by.

My money is on gas checked cast with wheel weight, but we'll see if I'm right or not.
Click to expand...

That's because they aren't doing it right.

The most accurate bullets I've shot out of match rifles are hand swaged using J4 copper jackets and weighed chunks of lead wire.

The only difference with the out of the box factory ammo is to not use premium bullets, with multi thickness jackets.

I've quite litterally shot several thousand such bullets with what I consider to be acceptable accuracy out of both Carcano and Arisaka rifles. These aren't MODERN rifles built with CNC equipment. As such they were built for a different accuracy standard.

I can remember a fellow that lurks here on CGN and makes the odd comment. I gave him a couple of hundred of the swaged .270 x 130 grain bullets for his M38 Arisaka. He got all snively because the best they would shoot was around 3 inches at 100 yards.

That was more than acceptable by the standards the rifle was built to attain.

You folks are comparing apples to oranges.

As for cast, not a thing wrong with that IMHO, especially if it gives you a comfortable feeling. Gone that route with both lubed and powder coated. Not a real fan of cast bullets but they are definitely much easier on the bore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom