Robert Prudhomme

That should keep him busy for a while.

What was the reason given on your video for the bullet not tumbling and breaking up in the water tank, Davey?

P.S. Here is a hint. The 6.5mm FMJ bullet was used to hunt elephants in Africa, mostly with head shots.

P.P.S. Tests conducted by some well paid government lackey impress me about as much as you do.

Congratulations! You've just demonstrated why a 162 grain 6.5 mm FMJ Carcano bullet should have travelled through JFK's skull without tumbling or breaking up.

P.S. Might I refer you to Mythbusters Episode #34, in which a .223, a .30-06 and a .50 calibre rifle are fired into a swimming pool? In each case, the bullet went no more than a foot or two and disintegrated into miniscule pieces.

Now, tell me everything you don't know about rifles and bullets, Davey. Remember, Mommy giving you a BB gun doesn't count here.

Have you ever even fired a rifle, Davey?

(and the Red Rider BB gun you got for Xmas doesn't count)

Have you ever fired a rifle into a tank of water, Davey, or can we add that to the growing list of topics you know absolutely nothing about?

I think the FBI made a lot of "assumptions" in the evidence they gave to the WC, as well as several Dallas agencies gathering statements that day.

If the shots were from "immediately behind us and over our heads", and they were at the pergola facing the motorcade, could the shots have come from the TSBD, which was to their left?

I love your tactics, Dave. They are right out of the Lone Nut handbook. "Ridicule the poster, assign ridiculous values to all of his arguments, pretend not to understand his arguments and continue to demean them."

1. The spent shells in the Sniper's Nest mean nothing. Anyone could have taken the rifle found on the 6th floor and fired 3 shots days before the assassination and planted the empty shells on the 6th floor. Remember how they only found 2 shells until a 3rd shell was needed?

2. Bullet fragments can be produced by shooting a rifle into a tank of water and then planting them in the limo. As we all know, the limo was a crime scene and this was violated when the SS stole the limo from Dallas. Can you say "inadmissible evidence", Davey?

3. CE 399 can be made by shooting another bullet into any kind of gelatinous substance. Want a slightly flattened base on it? No problem. Wrap it in felt and give it a light hit with a soft hammer. Once again, we have evidence problems, as there seem to be holes in the chain of custody. There was an attempt made by the FBI to rectify these problems by outright lying in some of their reports. If Oswald had actually been on trial, a good defense team would have destroyed CE 399 as evidence simply by calling to testify the very men who found CE 399, and claimed it was a pointed, not a round bullet.

Once again, Davey, you've got nothing, and you've always had nothing. You're just a man that talks a lot, and only the foolish listen to you.

Sure is good to see the FBI cleaning up statements like this. They were on the south side of Elm, watching the motorcade, facing the TSBD and heard shots come from immediately behind them and over their heads. Thank God the FBI straightened things out. The shots came from the TSBD, of course.

*sarcasm off*

Found it. CE 2560 is a record of a telephone conversation between the WC's Eisenberg and a Mr. Warner at the Aberdeen Proving grounds, in which the mounting of corrective shims on the base for the Carcano scope was discussed. To quote CE 2560:

"The gunsmith observed that the scope as we received it was installed as if for a left handed man."

I've been trying to locate where it was that I saw it was an FBI expert who explained the left mounted scope being for a right handed/left eye dominant shooter but I've had no luck. It is really bothering me, though, because the more I think about it, the more I am convinced it was one of the FBI "experts" who stated this.

Anyone have any recollections on this?

Hi Pat

Would you be so good as to post the particular frame of the Zapruder film showing Chaney riding beside the right rear fender of the limo?

Yeah, says you, Dave.

Let's see just how circumstantial ALL of your evidence is.

1. Three spent shells and two bullet fragments. LOL! I've got a whole box full of spent shells and you would have no trouble matching them to my rifles. Big deal. And bullet fragments? I can make all that you want.

2. CE 399? I can shoot a bullet out of one of my rifles and make a CE 399 for you any time you like. Doesn't prove a thing.

Sorry, Dave, none of these things prove the Carcano was fired that day, and they certainly don't prove Oswald fired the rifle on that day, or any other.

You've got nothing, Dave, and you've always had nothing. You're just a man that talks a lot, and only the foolish listen to you.

Bill

If you do not understand the argument, please stay out of it.

Dave

You are purposely evading the point here. The real issue, to me, is not that it was a 6.5 Carcano found on the 6th floor but, rather, whether or not that Carcano ever fired a bullet on 22.11.63.

The clue as to the likelihood of it not firing any bullets that day is that the clip, despite all the handling the rifle received, never fell out of the magazine until the rifle was halfway to the DPD headquarters.

Carcano clips typically fall right out of the magazine as soon as the last round is chambered. Explain to all of us why this one did not.

What do you make of Chaney saying he looked back over his left shoulder at JFK when the first shot was heard and again when the second shot was heard, claiming to see JFK hit by the second shot? I don't see him in the Zapruder film in this position but he certainly seems to be looking back over his left shoulder at JFK in Altgens 6.

And the clip, Dave? If he had accidentally bumped the rifle, would the clip not have fallen out some time before the rifle made it to the DPD?

Is James Chaney just another xxxx in a whole Plaza full of liars that day? Can anyone seriously look at Altgens 6 and try to tell me Chaney is not looking over his left shoulder at JFK?

Why is Chaney not seen beside the limo in the Zapruder film?

Hi Calli

Here is an interview with James Chaney, in which he says he not only went ahead of the limo and informed Curry in the lead car of JFK being shot, he also claims to have looked back over his left shoulder at the time of the first shot and the second shot, and claims to have seen JFK struck by the second shot.

Of course, neither the Nix or Zapruder film show Chaney either in a position to look back over his left shoulder at JFK at the time of the 1st or 2nd shots, nor do they show Chaney passing the limo to catch up with the lead car.

However, the Altgens photo most definitely shows Chaney far enough ahead on the right side of the limo for him to be able to look back over his left shoulder at JFK, which he is doing in the Altgens photo.

Small wonder James Chaney, one of the closest witnesses to the assassination, was never called to testify to the Warren Commission.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0gcAQNunbM

Robin, at what point did Chaney race ahead of the limousine, and tell Curry in the lead car that JFK had been shot?

One of the more comical Lame Nut talking points, and one universally accepted by this crowd even though there is not a shred of evidence to support it, is that the reason the scope on the Carcano found on the 6th floor was so badly out of adjustment is that Oswald, in a fit of madness (?), smashed the rifle against a post on the 6th floor just before he hid it.

If this were true, it would only serve to highlight another puzzling thing about the Carcano. When cartridges are loaded into the Carcano magazine, they must be in the en bloc clip that holds them. There is a spring loaded elevator bar that pushes up on the bottom cartridge in the clip, but does not contact the clip itself. When the last cartridge is chambered, there is nothing to hold the clip up and it simply falls out the bottom of the magazine onto the ground.

Should this clip hang up in the magazine, the tiniest of bumps will jar it loose and make it drop out. With all of the handling by the shooter, following the chambering of the fourth and last cartridge, and the handling by the DPD searching for fingerprints, the clip does not fall out, and is not seen until Day is carrying the Carcano on Houston St. Oddly, it still has not fallen to the ground, but can be seen protruding partway out of the magazine.

One would think a blow hard enough to knock the scope out of alignment would have easily jarred the clip loose.

Long time passing.....

I think the Carcanos won the popularity contest mostly by default. Most of them, and the ammunition for them, had been left behind by fleeing Italians during WW II. Considering that the SMI ammunition was not the greatest to begin with, and the primers fitted into the bases of the cartridges were corrosive, and the ammunition would be almost 70 years old (or much older) by that point, I'm sure they had lots of fun with those Carcanos.

Hi Chris

I began wondering where the theory of the scope being mounted on the Carcano for a left handed person, or a right handed, left eye dominant person, actually got its beginnings. For some strange reason I seem to recall it was one of the FBI agents that told this to the WC. Any ideas?

At a 200 yard target, assuming your Enfield was sighted in for 100 yards, where were your bullets hitting on the target?

Our story has brought us up to the period immediately preceding the Second World War and the introduction, to the Italian army, of a whole new concept in weaponry; namely, the Fucile Corto or "short rifle", made famous as the alleged assassination weapon of JFK on 22/11/63. We will be concentrating mainly on these short rifles in this installment and, for that reason, there is one fact related to short rifles I would like you to keep in the forefront of your mind as you read this. The M91/38 6.5mm Carcano short rifle (Oswald's alleged rifle) began production in 1940 AND ended in 1940, with a handful being made in Terni in early 1941. It was replaced in 1941 with the all new M91/41 long rifle. This gives the M91/38 short rifle the distinction of being the shortest lived Italian military rifle model of the 20th Century and, for all I am aware of, the shortest lived military rifle model of ANY country in the 20th Century! What would make Italy, definitely not winning WW II, do something as drastic as abandon their main battle rifle and replace it with such a different design? Was there something that wrong with it that it was discarded so quickly, or were there deeper underlying reasons to kick it to the curb?

Anyways, after decades of listening to soldiers' complaints about the Carcano, Italian authorities became aware of two overwhelming desires; namely, a more compact short rifle that still maintained the long rifle's accuracy and a cartridge for that rifle that contained a bullet capable of doing far more damage in a wound than the 6.5x52 mm cartridge. Once again, they looked at their large inventories of M91 long rifles and came up with a brilliant idea.

The solution to all of their problems was an all new cartridge, the 7.35x51 mm, to be fired in an all new rifle, the 7.35mm M38 Carcano. In reality, the brass cartridge was a 6.5x52 mm cartridge with the neck opened up to accept the larger diameter bullet. The same was true of the 7.35mm short rifle; everything, including bolt, receiver and magazine was identical to every 6.5mm Carcano ever made.

Now, about recycling those 6.5mm M91 long rifles. The bore of a 6.5mm Carcano rifle barrel measures, of course, 6.5 mm. The widest internal diameter is the bottom of the rifling grooves and, from bottom of one groove to bottom of the opposite groove, these measure 6.8 mm in diameter. In a rather brilliant move, the Carcano makers removed the barrels from worn out M91 long rifles, cut them back in length from 31 inches to 21 inches, and re-bored the inside of the rifle barrel to a new bore diameter of 7.35 mm. By doing so, all traces of the 6.5 mm progressive twist rifling was removed, essentially creating a new barrel. According to records, new rifling grooves were then cut into the 7.35 mm bore. I have never been able to determine the depth these grooves were cut to but I would imagine these would have been as deep as the 6.5mm Carcano grooves. It is known that the progressive twist rifling was abandoned, in the interests of economy, and riflings with a standard rate of twist (1:10) were cut into the 7.35 mm barrels.

***** It is important to note that records do not show the rate of twist of the rifling (1:10) changing when production of the short rifle changed from 7.35mm to 6.5mm. While 1:10 might have been barely adequate for the 130 grain 7.35 mm bullet, the 162 grain 6.5 mm bullet, especially in a short barrel, would have required a rifling rate of at least 1:8 (1:7 preferably) to stabilize the bullet in flight. As you will recall, the much longer M91 barrel had a rate of twist, at the muzzle, of 1:8. ******

Other cost saving features were incorporated into the 7.35mm, such as a plain fixed rear sight zeroed at 300 metres, instead of the more expensive adjustable rear sights found on other Carcanos. For my money, I would have just kept the M91 adjustable rear sight on the salvaged barrel, but that's just me.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the 7.35mm bullet was a shameless copy of the British .303 Mk. VII cartridge's bullet. Instead of the round nose seen on the 6.5 mm bullet, the 7.35 mm bullet was pointed. And, like the Mk. VII, the 7.35 mm bullet had a light aluminum forward section inside the bullet jacket nose and a soft lead rear section. As I well explained earlier, these two features created a bullet that would tumble in a wound, instead of passing straight through as the 6.5 mm bullet did, and create massive injuries. This alone seemed to spell the end of the "Humanitarian Rifle" era.

Although larger in diameter, the 7.35 mm bullet was lighter than the 6.5 mm bullet, with the 7.35 mm bullet weighing only 130 grains, as opposed to the 162 grain 6.5 mm bullet. This was due to the spire point and the aluminum nose weighing less than a lead nose. The overall effect was greater muzzle velocity and a higher ballistic co-efficient than the 6.5 mm bullet.

This is something else that should be discussed while we are on the topic of shortening long barrels. When you cut a rifle barrel short, performance and muzzle velocity are ALWAYS sacrificed, simply because both the propellants in the cartridge and the rifling grooves now have less time and space to act on the bullet before it leaves the rifle barrel. Cutting a rifle barrel back from 31 inches to 17 inches, as they did with the carbines, and still shooting a heavy 162 grain bullet would give you poor performance from that carbine, even if the problem of the progressive twist rifling had been addressed. And this is also why the Carcano carbines produced such remarkable muzzle flashes; most of the gunpowder was burning outside of the barrel, instead of inside of the barrel where it could act on the bullet.

Anyways, the 7.35mm M38 Carcano seemed like a pretty good idea, and they were produced in great quantity from 1938-1939. It should be noted here that, while the Italians had great stores of 6.5x52mm ammo left over from their African campaigns (fitted with corrosive primers and getting older by the day), the M91 long rifle, plus all of its carbine derivatives, was now considered obsolete; and to be slowly replaced by new 7.35mm short rifles, plus new 7.35mm carbines. A bit of a risky plan just before a major war but, caution and careful planning were not two of Mussolini's strong traits.

Production of the 7.35mm ceased in 1939. All 7.35mm rifles were recalled and, contrary to popular belief, they were not refitted with 6.5mm barrels. The majority of these rifles found their way into the hands of Finnish troops, who used them in their war with Russia.

In 1940, production of the 6.5mm M91/38 short rifle began. It was identical in every way to the 7.35mm M38 short rifle, except now the fixed rear sight was zeroed at 200 metres instead of 300 metres, as on the M38. This change in the rear sight is no small thing as I believe the makers of this rifle were well aware of the drop in performance the M91/38 would suffer.

The official reason for discontinuing the 7.35mm, and one touted by WC supporters, is that the Italians were unable to stockpile sufficient quantities of 7.35x51 mm cartridges prior to the start of WW II. This seems to be universally accepted but, if we look closely, does it really make that much sense? A rifle cartridge is a simple thing to make; far easier than a rifle and much much easier than a rifle barrel. In fact, the rifle barrel is the most complicated component of a rifle to make.

******* If the plan had been to make new 7.35mm short rifle barrels (21 inches long) by cutting down worn out M91 long rifle barrels (31 inches and progressive twist rifling) and re-boring them and cutting standard twist rifling in them, and they had never planned, in 1938, to make another 6.5mm rifle of any kind again, where did they find new barrels for the 6.5mm M91/38 short rifles they began making in 1940? ************

The stockpiles of 6.5x52mm cartridges could have been recycled as 7.35x51mm cartridges. It would have been as simple as pulling the 6.5 mm bullet, trimming the case back 1 mm to 51 mm, expanding the case neck to accommodate a larger bullet and reseating the new 7.35 mm bullet in the case. I could easily do all of this with common handloading tools, if I had the correct 7.35 mm resizing dies. I'm not sure if the same gunpowder was used in both cartridges but this could have been changed, as well. The point is, I don't believe the Italians were any better at stockpiling new 6.5mm short rifle barrels, especially for a rifle and calibre they never planned to produce, than they were at stockpiling 7.35mm rifle cartridges. The story makes no logical sense.

What does make sense is that they still had great stocks of M91 long rifles and 6.5x52 mm ammo. Now, think of how things looked to many Italians in 1939. Despite the blusterings of Mussolini, many Italians were becoming aware that the two greatest mistakes made by Italy in the 20th Century were 1) allowing Mussolini to assume control and 2) allowing Mussolini to enter into an alliance with Nazi Germany. The writing was on the wall, and many planners could see a hurting of immense proportions headed Italy's way.

Despite this, of course, it would still be necessary to produce Carcano short rifles but, the ability to procure steel to make new 6.5 short barrels (with standard twist rifling) might be interrupted. Who knew how bad things could get? Also, the inventories of 6.5 mm cartridges were insurance against a munitions factory being unable to produce 7.35 mm cartridges.

While I am sure the small arms factories made every effort to make new 21 inch 6.5 mm short rifle barrels, it cannot be denied that in 1939-1940, Italy was far from prepared for war. Mussolini had signed the "Pact of Steel" with Hitler, in which it was stipulated that neither country was to make war without the other before 1943. Hitler jumped the gun slightly on this, with his invasion of Poland in 1939. Though he knew his country needed a few more years to prepare for war, Mussolini blustered indecisively for many months before declaring war on the Allies in June, 1940; midway through the single production year of the M91/38 Carcano short rifle.

As Italy's iron ore and steel production was only a fraction of other nations such as Britain and Germany, and steel would be needed for many other war items beside rifle barrels, and Italy's fragile import network was also painfully obvious (1/4 of their ocean freighters were impounded as soon as Italy declared war), it would have become obvious to the arms makers that they may not be able to procure sufficient amounts of steel to make rifle barrels.

What to do? Same thing they had done for years. Plan for making new short rifle barrels, but be prepared to cut M91 long rifle barrels from 31 inches to 21 inches to make short rifle barrels, should steel be unavailable. It would be necessary to turn the outer surface of the barrels on a lathe to achieve the short barrel diameter, but this would be a straightforward process. Other than changing the rear and fore sights and the stock and turning the straight M91 bolt handle down, the rest of the rifle is the same between the two models.

This may all seem farfetched but, it is not uncommon on shooting forums to have the owner of an M91/38 short rifle complaining about the inaccuracy of his rifle, only to discover his barrel has progressive twist rifling, or should I say, the "leftovers" of an M91's progressive twist rifling.

It is also interesting to note that all carbine versions of the M91/38 short rifle are listed as having progressive twist rifling. Were these new rifle barrels, 17 inches long, with a compressed version of progressive twist rifling, or were they simply, once again, cut down M91 long rifles?

Next, we have what is perhaps Italy's strangest move of all concerning the 6.5mm Carcano. The M91/38 short rifle, of Dealey Plaza fame and the most incredible rifle in history (according to WC supporters), began production in early 1940 and ENDED production in early 1941, being replaced by an all new design of long rifle; the M91/41 long rifle.

What made Italy drop the M91/38 short rifle after only ONE year of production?