Carcano video on youtube

[John Geraghty]

Some comments from the maker of the video in reponse to youtube users

1 of 4 Partial and misleading information doesnt help your cause. Your definition describing the rifle as second hand, misleads people into thinking it was a poor rifle. All military rifles are second hand. When you say he could have purchased a new rifle but would have had to give his name? That is more misleading nonsense, there were not mandatory rifle registration laws then.

2 of 4 When you say his scope was misaligned it is also intentionally misleading. It gives the reader an impression that his scope was not functional. The rifle tests were conducted by FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier. He tested the rifle and found that at 100 yards, it fired 2.5 to 5 inches too high, and 2 to 5 inches too far to the right. Ironically, this slight misalignment actually benefited Oswald.

3 of 4 With a 160 grain 6.5 Carcano round, on a target 88 yards away, traveling at 11 MPH, the vertical lead would have been just less than 4 inches, and the horizontal would have been approximately 2 inches. Please dont mislead with blanket statements like, misaligned scope.

4 of 4 And finally, about my rifle being accurate, my rifle was made at the same plant as LHOs, and it was manufactured the same year. LHOs rifle was roughly 20 years old when he shot JFK, mine is now 60+ year past the date it was manufactured and shoots very well, but somehow you wish to mislead people that my rifle is accurate, while LHOs was not. Weak.

Im my other video posted here on youtube, I fire seven rounds from this same rifle at a 24 inch by 24 inch wooden target posted at roughly seventy yards. I was able to get off seven shots, all hits, in 6.8 seconds.

And yes, it would have been easy (for anyone familiar with this type of rifle, Oswald was familiar with one) to accurately get the shots off as Oswald did.

7 of 8 Craig never saw the rifle, he certainly never observed a 7.65 Mauser, and his own statements support that. He alleges that he clearly saw 7.65 Mauser on the top of the receiver. Thats interesting, because the top of all the 7.65 Mausers is covered by the scope mount, he never would have been able to have seen the 7.65 stamp as he alleged.

8 of 8 And lastly, the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano. Please Google "firearms factoids bogus buff ballistics." For a more in depth look at that claim. This site also provides information how the Carcano could easily be mistaken for a Mauser.

What do you all make of this video and the creators comments? The video has 1940 views, so it is not very popular by youtube standards.

[Mark Knight]

John, one of the points that Tom Purvis has been trying to make is that there IS a difference in the accuracy of different Mannlicher-Carcano rifles...even the ones sold by Klein's Sporting Goods.

The ones referred to as a model 91/24--such as the one ordered in the name of A. Hidell--was a rifle that originally left the factory with "progressive-gain twist" rifling...that is, the rifling grooves in the barrel did NOT have a constant rate of twist. The rate of twist to the rifling increased closer to the muzzle end of the barrel. And by cutting off some barrel length to become the rifle advertised by Klein's, much of the accuracy was lost, as the bullet had less spin imparted on it by the rifling in the barrel.

On the other hand, the rifle recovered in the TSBD was NOT a shortened rifle, but instead was a rifle that came from the manufacturer with the same length barrel as it had when recovered. Therefore, THAT rifle would have had a high degree of accuracy, similar to that cited by the person who posted the Youtube video.

So some Carcanos were accurate, and some weren't. A. Hidell ordered the inaccurate model...and yet the accurate model was recovered from the TSBD.

[Denis Pointing]

John, one of the points that Tom Purvis has been trying to make is that there IS a difference in the accuracy of different Mannlicher-Carcano rifles...even the ones sold by Klein's Sporting Goods.

The ones referred to as a model 91/24--such as the one ordered in the name of A. Hidell--was a rifle that originally left the factory with "progressive-gain twist" rifling...that is, the rifling grooves in the barrel did NOT have a constant rate of twist. The rate of twist to the rifling increased closer to the muzzle end of the barrel. And by cutting off some barrel length to become the rifle advertised by Klein's, much of the accuracy was lost, as the bullet had less spin imparted on it by the rifling in the barrel.

On the other hand, the rifle recovered in the TSBD was NOT a shortened rifle, but instead was a rifle that came from the manufacturer with the same length barrel as it had when recovered. Therefore, THAT rifle would have had a high degree of accuracy, similar to that cited by the person who posted the Youtube video.

So some Carcanos were accurate, and some weren't. A. Hidell ordered the inaccurate model...and yet the accurate model was recovered from the TSBD.

Mark, at that time the gun market was literally flooded with Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, the wholesalers were shipping them out to outlets like Klein's by the thousands. I belive its at least possible that with bulk selling of that size the outlets were sent a mixture of both shortened and unshortened rifles. The vast majority would have been the shortened inaccurate type certainly, but at least a few 'lucky' outlets would have received some of the accurate unshortened type. If this was the case then because of the bad name Mannlicher-Carcano rifles had, somewhat unfairly, acquired plus the fact that Klein's had got them so cheaply it just wouldn't have been economically viable to separate the good from the bad. If I'm right, and I admit its only a reasoned guess, Klein's would have advertised them all as 91/24 type because of advertising standard's. Which means of course that the rifle Oswald received from Klein's and the rifle found on the sixth floor could be one and the same. As to if Oswald actually fired that rifle at the President or not isn't really relevant to this post. Any thoughts? Disagreement's are welcome.

As for the other points raised by the 'youtube' video maker I belive the guy's 100% correct. I myself have pointed out on several post's that "the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano."

Edited September 8, 2009 by Denis Pointing

[Antti Hynonen]

Some comments from the maker of the video in reponse to youtube users

1 of 4 Partial and misleading information doesnt help your cause. Your definition describing the rifle as second hand, misleads people into thinking it was a poor rifle. All military rifles are second hand. When you say he could have purchased a new rifle but would have had to give his name? That is more misleading nonsense, there were not mandatory rifle registration laws then.

2 of 4 When you say his scope was misaligned it is also intentionally misleading. It gives the reader an impression that his scope was not functional. The rifle tests were conducted by FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier. He tested the rifle and found that at 100 yards, it fired 2.5 to 5 inches too high, and 2 to 5 inches too far to the right. Ironically, this slight misalignment actually benefited Oswald.

3 of 4 With a 160 grain 6.5 Carcano round, on a target 88 yards away, traveling at 11 MPH, the vertical lead would have been just less than 4 inches, and the horizontal would have been approximately 2 inches. Please dont mislead with blanket statements like, misaligned scope.

4 of 4 And finally, about my rifle being accurate, my rifle was made at the same plant as LHOs, and it was manufactured the same year. LHOs rifle was roughly 20 years old when he shot JFK, mine is now 60+ year past the date it was manufactured and shoots very well, but somehow you wish to mislead people that my rifle is accurate, while LHOs was not. Weak.

Im my other video posted here on youtube, I fire seven rounds from this same rifle at a 24 inch by 24 inch wooden target posted at roughly seventy yards. I was able to get off seven shots, all hits, in 6.8 seconds.

And yes, it would have been easy (for anyone familiar with this type of rifle, Oswald was familiar with one) to accurately get the shots off as Oswald did.

7 of 8 Craig never saw the rifle, he certainly never observed a 7.65 Mauser, and his own statements support that. He alleges that he clearly saw 7.65 Mauser on the top of the receiver. Thats interesting, because the top of all the 7.65 Mausers is covered by the scope mount, he never would have been able to have seen the 7.65 stamp as he alleged.

8 of 8 And lastly, the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano. Please Google "firearms factoids bogus buff ballistics." For a more in depth look at that claim. This site also provides information how the Carcano could easily be mistaken for a Mauser.

What do you all make of this video and the creators comments? The video has 1940 views, so it is not very popular by youtube standards.

Hi John,

Haven't seen the video.

A couple of things do catch my attention:

7/8 Craig says he saw the 7.65 Mauser on the Barrel of the weapon, not the receiver.

Here's R. Craig's interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybvfnZ3vDYw...=PL&index=2

Some pictures of Mauser's (with and without scope):

http://media.photobucket.com/image/mauser%...mauser004-1.jpg

http://media.photobucket.com/image/7.65%20...user1940762.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/85E6782257AAC80/standard.jpg

I'm not sure what type of Mauser would have the manuf. stamp etc. not visible if a scope were mounted. Perhaps there is one like that too.

4/4 To clarify, was the weapon discussed/fired by the person here exactly the same type and model as the TSBD rifle?

Im my other video posted here on youtube, I fire seven rounds from this same rifle at a 24 inch by 24 inch wooden target posted at roughly seventy yards. I was able to get off seven shots, all hits, in 6.8 seconds.

Makes..... 4/4 To clarify, was the weapon discussed/fired by the person here exactly the same type and model as the TSBD rifle?" .......ever so important, imo.

Doesn't leave much time to aim....

I find this 7 shots in under 7 seconds hard to believe, but I guess it's gotta be true because it's on tv (youtube)......???? I guess it is comparable to firing 3 bullets (all hits) into a moving target of a similar size some 70-100 yards away in a desceding angle... I don't know.

Some other key points to note/consider/discuss in this area:

According to many witnesses the two first shots were fired almost on top of each other, whereas the 3rd shot was fired at an intervall of perhaps 6 seconds. Can one fire two shots from a MC 91/24 in rapid succession (apparently less than 1 second apart), considering the success in hits as attributed to Lee Oswald in this case?

I'm sure there are many accurate and deadly Carcano's out there that are of the same era as the one attributed to Lee Oswald. Like many others, I just have doubts the shooting occurred in the way the WC claimed it did.

Edited September 2, 2009 by Antti Hynonen

[Denis Pointing]

QUOTE (Mark Knight @ Sep 1 2009, 09:09 PM)

John, one of the points that Tom Purvis has been trying to make is that there IS a difference in the accuracy of different Mannlicher-Carcano rifles...even the ones sold by Klein's Sporting Goods.

The ones referred to as a model 91/24--such as the one ordered in the name of A. Hidell--was a rifle that originally left the factory with "progressive-gain twist" rifling...that is, the rifling grooves in the barrel did NOT have a constant rate of twist. The rate of twist to the rifling increased closer to the muzzle end of the barrel. And by cutting off some barrel length to become the rifle advertised by Klein's, much of the accuracy was lost, as the bullet had less spin imparted on it by the rifling in the barrel.

On the other hand, the rifle recovered in the TSBD was NOT a shortened rifle, but instead was a rifle that came from the manufacturer with the same length barrel as it had when recovered. Therefore, THAT rifle would have had a high degree of accuracy, similar to that cited by the person who posted the Youtube video.

So some Carcanos were accurate, and some weren't. A. Hidell ordered the inaccurate model...and yet the accurate model was recovered from the TSBD.

................................................................................

.........................................

Mark, at that time the gun market was literally flooded with Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, the wholesalers were shipping them out to outlets like Klein's by the thousands. I belive its at least possible that with bulk selling of that size the outlets were sent a mixture of both shortened and unshortened rifles. The vast majority would have been the shortened inaccurate type certainly, but at least a few 'lucky' outlets would have received some of the accurate unshortened type. If this was the case then because of the bad name Mannlicher-Carcano rifles had, somewhat unfairly, acquired plus the fact that Klein's had got them so cheaply it just wouldn't have been economically viable to separate the good from the bad. If I'm right, and I admit its only a reasoned guess, Klein's would have advertised them all as 91/24 type because of advertising standard's. Which means of course that the rifle Oswald received from Klein's and the rifle found on the sixth floor could be one and the same. As to if Oswald actually fired that rifle at the President or not isn't really relevant to this post. Any thoughts? Disagreement's are welcome.

As for the other points raised by the 'youtube' video maker I belive the guy's 100% correct. I myself have pointed out on several post's that "the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano."

................................................................................

...........................................

I just found a copy of some very interesting shipping documents which would seem to back up my theory. They not only show the incredible vast quantities of Carcano's that were shipped to the USA but they also comment on how badly the rifles were stored and even say that many were collected straight from the battlefield! After reading the documents there really can be little doubt that there's, at least, a very good chance that both unshortened and shortened (accurate and inaccurate) Carcano's were indeed mixed together. Here's the link :http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pdf/WH25_CE_2562.pdf

This post has been edited by Denis Pointing: Today, 11:39 PM

Edited September 8, 2009 by Denis Pointing

[Gil Jesus]

1933 Argentine Mauser with stamping on receiver. Could Craig have mistook receiver for barrel ?

http://i28.tinypic.com/35hgs9x.jpg

[Pat Speer]

Some comments from the maker of the video in reponse to youtube users

1 of 4 Partial and misleading information doesnt help your cause. Your definition describing the rifle as second hand, misleads people into thinking it was a poor rifle. All military rifles are second hand. When you say he could have purchased a new rifle but would have had to give his name? That is more misleading nonsense, there were not mandatory rifle registration laws then.

2 of 4 When you say his scope was misaligned it is also intentionally misleading. It gives the reader an impression that his scope was not functional. The rifle tests were conducted by FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier. He tested the rifle and found that at 100 yards, it fired 2.5 to 5 inches too high, and 2 to 5 inches too far to the right. Ironically, this slight misalignment actually benefited Oswald.

3 of 4 With a 160 grain 6.5 Carcano round, on a target 88 yards away, traveling at 11 MPH, the vertical lead would have been just less than 4 inches, and the horizontal would have been approximately 2 inches. Please dont mislead with blanket statements like, misaligned scope.

4 of 4 And finally, about my rifle being accurate, my rifle was made at the same plant as LHOs, and it was manufactured the same year. LHOs rifle was roughly 20 years old when he shot JFK, mine is now 60+ year past the date it was manufactured and shoots very well, but somehow you wish to mislead people that my rifle is accurate, while LHOs was not. Weak.

Im my other video posted here on youtube, I fire seven rounds from this same rifle at a 24 inch by 24 inch wooden target posted at roughly seventy yards. I was able to get off seven shots, all hits, in 6.8 seconds.

And yes, it would have been easy (for anyone familiar with this type of rifle, Oswald was familiar with one) to accurately get the shots off as Oswald did.

7 of 8 Craig never saw the rifle, he certainly never observed a 7.65 Mauser, and his own statements support that. He alleges that he clearly saw 7.65 Mauser on the top of the receiver. Thats interesting, because the top of all the 7.65 Mausers is covered by the scope mount, he never would have been able to have seen the 7.65 stamp as he alleged.

8 of 8 And lastly, the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano. Please Google "firearms factoids bogus buff ballistics." For a more in depth look at that claim. This site also provides information how the Carcano could easily be mistaken for a Mauser.

What do you all make of this video and the creators comments? The video has 1940 views, so it is not very popular by youtube standards.

I exchanged a few words with the maker of this video, and he revealed himself to be quite the fraud by deleting all the negative comments on his video. He insists he can hit seven shots on a moving target in seven seconds with his Carcano, and wants to bet me on it. I've tried to explain to him that I don't care what he can do with his Carcano, but that he is implying anyone can hit seven shots in seven seconds with an hour's practice, on a rifle in the condition of OSWALD'S Carcano. I have tried to explain that the FBI, Army, CBS News, Dr. Lattimer, etc. all performed tests on the rifle, or on rifles in similar condition, and found it to fire no faster than once every 2 seconds when firing on a moving target.

But he's too ignorant to care. "You implying I can't hit the shots? Wanna man-up and make a bet on it?" What a joke...

He's an obvious fraud trying to make a name for himself by proving that rat bastard commie killed Kennedy. Probably a birther...

[Antti Hynonen]

Some comments from the maker of the video in reponse to youtube users

1 of 4 Partial and misleading information doesnt help your cause. Your definition describing the rifle as second hand, misleads people into thinking it was a poor rifle. All military rifles are second hand. When you say he could have purchased a new rifle but would have had to give his name? That is more misleading nonsense, there were not mandatory rifle registration laws then.

2 of 4 When you say his scope was misaligned it is also intentionally misleading. It gives the reader an impression that his scope was not functional. The rifle tests were conducted by FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier. He tested the rifle and found that at 100 yards, it fired 2.5 to 5 inches too high, and 2 to 5 inches too far to the right. Ironically, this slight misalignment actually benefited Oswald.

3 of 4 With a 160 grain 6.5 Carcano round, on a target 88 yards away, traveling at 11 MPH, the vertical lead would have been just less than 4 inches, and the horizontal would have been approximately 2 inches. Please dont mislead with blanket statements like, misaligned scope.

4 of 4 And finally, about my rifle being accurate, my rifle was made at the same plant as LHOs, and it was manufactured the same year. LHOs rifle was roughly 20 years old when he shot JFK, mine is now 60+ year past the date it was manufactured and shoots very well, but somehow you wish to mislead people that my rifle is accurate, while LHOs was not. Weak.

Im my other video posted here on youtube, I fire seven rounds from this same rifle at a 24 inch by 24 inch wooden target posted at roughly seventy yards. I was able to get off seven shots, all hits, in 6.8 seconds.

And yes, it would have been easy (for anyone familiar with this type of rifle, Oswald was familiar with one) to accurately get the shots off as Oswald did.

7 of 8 Craig never saw the rifle, he certainly never observed a 7.65 Mauser, and his own statements support that. He alleges that he clearly saw 7.65 Mauser on the top of the receiver. Thats interesting, because the top of all the 7.65 Mausers is covered by the scope mount, he never would have been able to have seen the 7.65 stamp as he alleged.

8 of 8 And lastly, the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano. Please Google "firearms factoids bogus buff ballistics." For a more in depth look at that claim. This site also provides information how the Carcano could easily be mistaken for a Mauser.

What do you all make of this video and the creators comments? The video has 1940 views, so it is not very popular by youtube standards.

I exchanged a few words with the maker of this video, and he revealed himself to be quite the fraud by deleting all the negative comments on his video. He insists he can hit seven shots on a moving target in seven seconds with his Carcano, and wants to bet me on it. I've tried to explain to him that I don't care what he can do with his Carcano, but that he is implying anyone can hit seven shots in seven seconds with an hour's practice, on a rifle in the condition of OSWALD'S Carcano. I have tried to explain that the FBI, Army, CBS News, Dr. Lattimer, etc. all performed tests on the rifle, or on rifles in similar condition, and found it to fire no faster than once every 2 seconds when firing on a moving target.

But he's too ignorant to care. "You implying I can't hit the shots? Wanna man-up and make a bet on it?" What a joke...

He's an obvious fraud trying to make a name for himself by proving that rat bastard commie killed Kennedy. Probably a birther...

The 2 seconds per shot sounds like it might be possible, if you don't need to take time to aim.

The person claiming to shoot 7 shots in under 7 seconds has to be wrong, it makes no sense.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Antti Hynonen

[Pat Speer]

The 2 seconds per shot sounds like it might be possible, if you don't need to take time to aim.

The person claiming to shoot 7 shots in under 7 seconds has to be wrong, it makes no sense.

Exactly. I watched the video in which he fires the shots. He fires on a stationary target (a door) and never lifts his head. One of the problems with the Carcano--to my understanding--was that the bolt action was extremely stiff and people had to take their eyes off the target between rounds to operate the bolt. And so I mentioned that his rifle was clearly not in the same condition as Oswald's. (I would guess he has fixed it up in some way--perhaps he replaced the bolt with something much much easier to operate.) That was what led to both his deleting my old messages and making me a wager.

Edited September 11, 2009 by Pat Speer

[David G. Healy]

John, one of the points that Tom Purvis has been trying to make is that there IS a difference in the accuracy of different Mannlicher-Carcano rifles...even the ones sold by Klein's Sporting Goods.

The ones referred to as a model 91/24--such as the one ordered in the name of A. Hidell--was a rifle that originally left the factory with "progressive-gain twist" rifling...that is, the rifling grooves in the barrel did NOT have a constant rate of twist. The rate of twist to the rifling increased closer to the muzzle end of the barrel. And by cutting off some barrel length to become the rifle advertised by Klein's, much of the accuracy was lost, as the bullet had less spin imparted on it by the rifling in the barrel.

On the other hand, the rifle recovered in the TSBD was NOT a shortened rifle, but instead was a rifle that came from the manufacturer with the same length barrel as it had when recovered. Therefore, THAT rifle would have had a high degree of accuracy, similar to that cited by the person who posted the Youtube video.

So some Carcanos were accurate, and some weren't. A. Hidell ordered the inaccurate model...and yet the accurate model was recovered from the TSBD.

Mark, at that time the gun market was literally flooded with Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, the wholesalers were shipping them out to outlets like Klein's by the thousands. I belive its at least possible that with bulk selling of that size the outlets were sent a mixture of both shortened and unshortened rifles. The vast majority would have been the shortened inaccurate type certainly, but at least a few 'lucky' outlets would have received some of the accurate unshortened type. If this was the case then because of the bad name Mannlicher-Carcano rifles had, somewhat unfairly, acquired plus the fact that Klein's had got them so cheaply it just wouldn't have been economically viable to separate the good from the bad. If I'm right, and I admit its only a reasoned guess, Klein's would have advertised them all as 91/24 type because of advertising standard's. Which means of course that the rifle Oswald received from Klein's and the rifle found on the sixth floor could be one and the same. As to if Oswald actually fired that rifle at the President or not isn't really relevant to this post. Any thoughts? Disagreement's are welcome.

As for the other points raised by the 'youtube' video maker I belive the guy's 100% correct. I myself have pointed out on several post's that "the recovery of the rifle was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV, and his footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano."

and how did one determine that the MC found on the 6th floor was fired on Nov 22nd 1963?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

John, one of the points that Tom Purvis has been trying to make is that there IS a difference in the accuracy of different Mannlicher-Carcano rifles...even the ones sold by Klein's Sporting Goods.

The ones referred to as a model 91/24--such as the one ordered in the name of A. Hidell--was a rifle that originally left the factory with "progressive-gain twist" rifling...that is, the rifling grooves in the barrel did NOT have a constant rate of twist. The rate of twist to the rifling increased closer to the muzzle end of the barrel. And by cutting off some barrel length to become the rifle advertised by Klein's, much of the accuracy was lost, as the bullet had less spin imparted on it by the rifling in the barrel.

On the other hand, the rifle recovered in the TSBD was NOT a shortened rifle, but instead was a rifle that came from the manufacturer with the same length barrel as it had when recovered. Therefore, THAT rifle would have had a high degree of accuracy, similar to that cited by the person who posted the Youtube video.

So some Carcanos were accurate, and some weren't. A. Hidell ordered the inaccurate model...and yet the accurate model was recovered from the TSBD.

It would appear that for the most part, your "re-learning" process is now virtually complete.

Hopefully, that process would also include the ability to distinguish the "Boolshooters" from the "Bullshi**ers".

The latter usually has to come up with some excuse such as the dog ate my paperwork and/or the CIA stole all of my proof.

Whereas, the former will normally possess at least the minimal documents to substantiate that they have some knowledge of the subject matter.