The "Dangerous Eaton Carcano" - A Myth Busted - Updated 2 June

Andy

Andy

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
329   0   0
Location
Ottawa
The "Dangerous Eaton Carcano" - A Myth Busted - Updated 3 Dec

This is a follow-up to http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=79730&page=3&highlight=eaton where I challenged the belief that the Eaton Carcano was unsafe to shoot except with perhaps special reduced loads. The three pages of background info found there will not be repeated here.

I am a skeptic at heart. I do not believe everything I read, even on Gunnutz ;), and particularly when:

a. it is based on hearsay (an old gunsmith told my friend, etc.); and
b. it makes no sense.

I have two complete and one Eaton Carcano parts gun, and when I bought my first, I was warned not to shoot it. Both points a. and b. applied, so I examined the gun, particularly the "dangerous" method by which the barrel was affixed, and was not convinced. Once I found a parts gun to test, I was on my way (at the other end of a long string) - doing some original Gunnutz research.

Some Crude "Proof-Testing"

The first load was a full strength load with H4895, followed by the same H4895 load plus 30%, then a case full of Unique, a fast pistol powder. 27.0 gr of Unique behind a 160gr bullet in the small 6.5mm Carcano runs pressure just a bit short of 100K psi. The barrel held, the receiver was undamaged, but the cartridge did not fare well. The pictures show the results:

- casehead blown to bits;
- extractor blown off the bolt; and
- brass powder covers the bolthead.

Pic 1 - The Barrel "Stub" into which the new barrel is affixed and held by a set-screw. It is said to be pressed in, but it might be screwed in - I will find out.

Eaton_Carcano_Barrel.jpg


Pic 2 - The Bolthead and remnants of the Casehead - note that the extractor is missing.

Eaton_Carcano_Bolt_and_Pieces.jpg


Pic 3 - a view into the chamber showing where the extractor (lower right) and brass bits went. You can clearly see the majority of the cartridge still in the chamber.

Eaton_Carcano_Chamber.jpg


I submit that my Eaton Carcano is not inherently dangerous so far as its design (action strength and receiver-barrel integrity) is concerned. I doubt that my example was "accidently" made exceedingly strong, so I say - "Myth Busted".
 
Last edited:
Andy - I do not know about ammunition availability in the 1930s. Is it possible that the Cooey/Eaton Carcanos, which were chambered for 6.5x54 MS got used with 6.5x52MC ammunition? This MIGHT have caused case separations, which would have been disconcerting.
 
- According to John A. Belton (the authority on Cooey products) the Eaton Carcano were re-chambered for 6.5 Mannlicher-Schonauer and used a special reduced load the box had a pink label on it to identify it. Rifles were removed from sales after numerous accidents and litigations following these accidents.

- I met John Belton a few times when I started going to gunshows in Montreal 25 years ago, he was an Engineer and a well known gun and cartridge collector and he knew was he was talking about.
 
Be that as it may, a Carcano should be able to digest standard 6.5x54MS cartridges.
The explorer, Stephansson (sp?), used custom MS rifles set up by one of the prominent British gunmakers, who also supplied the ammunition - his own loading. It was too hot, there were case failures, and Stephansson was temporarily blinded on one occasion.
A chap I knew had a MC rifle. He was having problems with it. Checked a fired case and it was obvious that the rifle had been rechambered to MS, and he was shooting MC in it. The casehead was almost unreadable, the primer was very badly flattened.
By the same token, Andy's rifles, and the others that turn up from time to time are the ones that survived. There may have been others, that didn't.
 
Yes Andy's rifles survived, but it is not a myth that many did not and people were hurt by them.
 
Last edited:
I have John Belton's "Handbook" on Cooeys and have read the section on the Eaton Carcano. He cites no sources, provides no specifics, and goes so far as to say "under no circumstances should anyone shoot this weak-actionned combination." The example I have has an action proven to be far stronger than needed for the stoutest loads, so I dismiss that statement, and have reason to further call into question not his overall knowledge of Cooey's, but his unsubstantiated statements and opinions on the Eaton variant.

How many firearms caused injuries? He says "Not long after introduction, serious accidents, and it is believed deaths occurred with these arms". So he's sure people were injured, but not sure if anyone was killed? They only kept stats on injuries?

If there was litigation, the claims as to the circumstances and causes of the injuries would have been documented. Has that been researched? Do we have any insight into when and why Cooey discontinued and it is believed, recalled this arm (apparently with little success).

This has all the hallmarks of a milsurp myth. A little-known firearm, with one small section in one small booklet making claims about it, and that becomes the authoritative tome to be quoted, embellished, treated as gospel.

I am an engineer too. Please, please explain how my "weak-actionned" Eaton Carcano stood up to a full-house plus 30%, then a 100K psi blast with nothing more than a broken extractor?
 
Andy said:
This has all the hallmarks of a milsurp myth. A little-known firearm, with one small section in one small booklet making claims about it, and that becomes the authoritative tome to be quoted, embellished, treated as gospel.
Click to expand...

I agree,

Such BS travels far...esp' along the gunshow circuits over the years, and now on the Internet.

Also I cannot see how such a defect would have made it to mass production for an Army. Sort of like the BS around threaded vs non threaded SKS barrels. :rolleyes:
 
Great bit of research you've done here Andy. I've never gone so far as to try and blow my Carcano up (M91/38 in 6.5 and military configuration), but I have been told on several occasions that it should be dangerous to shoot etc. It just isn't, it's a fine rifle, fit and finish, and if you stick to standard loads I see no reason to be wary or a Carcano.

It sounds to me like the whole "pressed barrel" fear is just as you said, a statement made once and repeated without question.
 
- I think he had access to Dominion/CIL records, I will try to get some more info. I know the editor of the pamplet is still around, I will ask if he has more info at the show next fall.

- We are not talking about the military issue rifles here, I have fired these for 30 years myself.
 
Last edited:
I am in no way suggesting that what I am about to mention has any connection with this exploding Eatons Carcano legend, however I found myself thinking (as I'm apt to do) about it when I read this post.

After about 1917 Carcano bolts were no longer serial numbered. With that said it would have been very easy for a few Yahoos to mix up a couple of bolts on these Eastons/Carcano sporters and possibly, just possibly, produce a few of these rifles with serious headspace issues. Next thing you know KABOOM and people screaming that it must have been those facists at Eatons and their pinned barrels, etc.

Again, I'm not suggesting this is what happened in any of these accidents that people talk about, just thinking out loud...:D
 
Good point about the military vs. civilian reworks JP.
I only brought up my rifle because I've heard plenty of horror stories about military carcano's being weak actioned as well. Different problem, but same hearsay evidence.
 
I have and I think Andy, so do you have a Carcano in 8x57JS (8mm mauser) It handles milsurp and handloads up to max without any problems. It was manufactured by Steyr and the action is identical to the M38. bearhunter
 
Could you supply any details?
I knew a chap whose .30-06 Parker Hale's barrel shattered into 5 pieces. The plugged barrel was the primary issue.
 
bearhunter said:
I have and I think Andy, so do you have a Carcano in 8x57JS (8mm mauser) It handles milsurp and handloads up to max without any problems. It was manufactured by Steyr and the action is identical to the M38. bearhunter
Click to expand...

Yes I do have one, and have been advised by the various "experts" in the US that it is not to be shot with normal loads as it was designed for lower pressure 6.5x52. No examples of damage or injury, no explanation, nothing as usual. That is why I did the same proof testing on a non-Cooeyized Carcano (posted last year on Gunnutz and Gunboards). Same 100K psi load, same result, except when I hammered open the bolt, the extractor did not break.

The Carcano action is very strong. A guy named Dave Emery from Hornady did similar tests with the same results and conclusions, but the masses continue to cling to their beliefs that they are dangerous. Silly really.
 
To further dispell any weakness issues, if that is the gun I think it is, that thing had plenty of wear to the action & the bolt. So a spring chicken it wasn't.
 
Andy
What kind of markings did the cooey/eaton/carc have?I have one in very poor shape w/double triggers/sleeved barrel shank and absolutely no markings.
Also when the Italians did a Tubatto (sp) was it a regular reline as it is done today or a shank insert as cooey did them?
Rich
 
desporterizer said:
To further dispell any weakness issues, if that is the gun I think it is, that thing had plenty of wear to the action & the bolt. So a spring chicken it wasn't.
Click to expand...

It is the same gun - but you knew I was going to abuse it. ;)

On the bright side, Clean out the chamber, replace the extractor and it would be good to go. However I am going to remove the barrel, and determone once and for all how the barrel was affixed to the stub - pressed in with a set-screw? Threaded in with set-screw?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom