6.5x52 mm Carcano - Elephant Gun?

[Robert Prudhomme]

"The 6.5 mm bullet, when fired, is like a flying drill," says Art Pence, a competitions firearms expert. Some game hunters use the 6.5 mm shell to bring down animals as large as elephants." ~~Gerald Posner~~ "Case Closed"

The above statement, by Posner, does not refer specifically to the 6.5 Carcano; although the rifle it refers to, the 6.5x54 mm Mannlicher-Schoenauer, shoots an almost identical long, roundnosed bullet at about the same muzzle velocity as the 6.5 Carcano. The 6.5 M-S and the 6.5 Carcano cartridges are almost indistinguishable visually and ballistically.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/65x54MS_zpsca76ef3d.jpg

6.5x54 Mannlicher-Schoenauer (left)

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/untitled-13_zpscd8557b9.png

6.5x52 Carcano (left)

From Wikipedia:

"Among professional elephant hunters of the 19th and 20th centuries, Walter Dalrymple Maitland "Karamojo" Bell, who shot more than 1,500 elephants[1] in the period 1895-1930, had a very high regard for the 6.5mm Mannlicher-Schoenauer, using it for approximately 300 of these kills."

What the Wikipedia author and Gerald Posner conveniently neglect to mention is just WHY an elephant hunter would elect to use a medium velocity, smaller calibre rifle, such as the 6.5 M-S or the 6.5 Carcano, to bring down an animal as large as an elephant, when there are so many higher velocity, larger calibre rifles available. They also neglect to mention that full metal jacket bullets were used to kill these elephants, as opposed to the soft point bullets normally used in hunting. There is a perfectly good reason for this, and you will be quite surprised once it is explained to you. Also, once you understand the reason for the selection of a lower speed, full metal jacket bullet of 6.5 mm calibre for killing elephants, you will understand what a monstrous fraud has been inflicted on the public by the conspirators in the JFK assassination. Suffice it to say, at this point, that the fatal head shot at frame z313 in the Zapruder film could NOT have been the result of a wound from a 6.5 Carcano full metal jacket bullet.

At this point, it is important that we all understand terms such as "rifle bore" "rifle calibre" "riflings" "lands and grooves" and "bullet diameter". Study the following drawing of the interior of a rifle barrel for a few seconds:

When a barrel is made for a rifle, the first step is to drill or "bore" a hole lengthwise inside the barrel. The diameter of this hole (just under .256" in a 6.5mm barrel) becomes known as the "calibre" or "bore" of the rifle. Hence, 6.5 mm = approximately .256". However, the diameter of the bullet is larger than this bore. Using special cutting tools, the machinist next cuts spiral grooves the entire inside length of the barrel, establishing the rifling grooves and leaving distinct "lands" between the grooves. The distance from the top of one land to the top of an opposing land is, once again, the calibre of the rifle.

It can be plainly seen that the bullet used in a rifle must be equal in diameter to the "groove diameter" of the barrel (the distance from the bottom of one groove to the bottom of an opposing groove in a barrel with four riflings). Herein lies one of the reasons for the selection of the 6.5 M-S and the 6.5 Carcano as effective elephant guns.

Not all armsmakers agree on the depth to cut rifling grooves. The vast majority of 6.5/.256 calibre rifles shoot a bullet .264" in diameter. There are two and only two exceptions to this. The makers of the 6.5 M-S made their rifling grooves deeper and chose a bullet .266" in diameter. The 6.5 Carcano is unique in that its designers chose to cut the rifling grooves so deep, it shoots a bullet that is a whopping .268" in diameter. As the Carcano riflings will still cut grooves in the copper bullet jacket to the depth of the rifle bore, it goes without saying that a 6.5 Carcano should cut much deeper rifling grooves in a bullet than other 6.5/.256 rifles. Looking at Warren Commission photos of CE 399 (the so called "magic bullet"), this would not appear to be the case. I would dearly love to get my hands on CE 399 and take my micrometer to it for five minutes.

As the whole point of making a full metal jacket military bullet is to make the jacket strong enough to prevent the jacket from coming apart and making horrible wounds in the person on the receiving end of it, it stands to reason the jacket walls on the sides of the bullet have to be a minimum thickness to maintain the integrity of the jacket. If not, the rifling marks cut in the jacket would remove enough metal from the jacket to weaken it and cause it to come apart on impact. So, it therefore stands to reason that, with a bore of .256" and a bullet diameter of .268", the Carcano 6.5 mm bullet (and the 6.5 M-S) must have jacket walls thicker than other 6.5/.256 bullets, which is actually the case.

Now, patient reader, it is time to tie all of these things together and explain how they relate to killing elephants.

The problem with shooting large game, such as elephants, has always been the penetrating capabilities of the bullets used. Elephants have remarkably thick skulls. The trick to killing them is to have a bullet that is like a "flying drill" that will penetrate the thick skull bone, without breaking up, in order to reach the elephant's brain intact and inflict damage upon it.

The 6.5 M-S and Carcano full metal jacket bullets are ideal candidates for this task. If their muzzle velocity was much higher than the roughly 2200 feet/second of both, more energy would be imparted to the bullets and they could break apart or tumble on impact with bone. Both bullets are very long, compared to their diameter, and have great inherent stability because of this. Both have round noses which allow the bullet to "punch" its way through bone, rather than tumbling on impact as a pointed bullet might. Both bullets have a relatively high mass for their calibre (160-162 grains), contributing to the inertia of the bullet during penetration. And, lastly, I pointed out that both the 6.5 M-S and Carcano bullets have thicker than normal jacket walls, making for a very strong bullet jacket that greatly resists deformation and breakup when travelling through dense material such as bone. As discussed in previous threads, the 6.5 Carcano was dubbed the "humanitarian rifle" by Italian troops, as it didn't seem capable of killing people. As can be seen, the 6.5 Carcano bullet's ability to go through a person intact, without breaking apart or tumbling and tearing up vital organs, certainly earned it this name. The only good thing about the 6.5 Carcano, as observed by Italian troops, is that it was possible to shoot more than one person with the same bullet.

By now, the more alert amongst you should be asking the obvious question: If these bullets were capable of penetrating elephant skull bones, or 48" of pine lumber (as the WC apologists constantly tell us), without deformation or breaking up, how is it that a 6.5 mm Carcano full metal jacket bullet entered the rear of JFK's skull and broke apart into many pieces? The simple answer is: It didn't.

There are rather gruesome videos, from the Second World War, of soldiers executed by firing squads equipped with 6.5 Carcano rifles. Many of these soldiers were shot in the head, some from the front and some from the back, and it is interesting to note that, from almost point blank range, the dramatic explosive results seen in the Zapruder film at z313 are never seen or duplicated.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Gary Murr]

Hello Robert:

Just a quick question in conjunction with this informative post; did you consider the possibility that the 6.5mm WCC ammunition theoretically used in the assassination was compromised before it was loaded and fired and this compromised condition led, in turn, to the deformation/break-up noted and discovered after the event?

Gary Murr

[Craig Lamson]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

[Robert Prudhomme]

Mr. Murr

I had not considered this at all. In what fashion do you think the cartridge might have been compromised?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

Mr. Lamson

Are you suggesting LHO purposely made a soft point or hollow point bullet by cutting the tip from a full metal jacket bullet?

I hardly think this could be the case, for a number of reasons.

First, the unfired cartridge in LHO's alleged Carcano was intact and unmodified, as WC evidence photos will attest. Do you seriously think LHO knew exactly how many rounds he needed and only scored one (or two) of them? Why was CE 399 not scored?

Second, I have tried this before with surplus Lee Enfield .303 cartridges. It is impossible to make a straight and even cut, even if all one is doing is scoring the tip (and considering the thickness of the 6.5 Carcano jacket, this would have to be a VERY deep score). Although a hit at very close range is possible, accuracy at distances approaching 100 yards suffers accordingly.

Third, was not the intact jacket nose of the bullet that hit JFK's head supposedly found in the front of the limousine?

Edited June 1, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Craig Lamson]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

Mr. Lamson

Are you suggesting LHO purposely made a soft point or hollow point bullet by cutting the tip from a full metal jacket bullet?

I hardly think this could be the case, for a number of reasons.

First, the unfired cartridge in LHO's alleged carcano was intact and unmodified, as WC evidence photos will attest. Do you seriously think LHO knew exactly how many rounds he needed and only scored one (or two) of them? Why was CE 399 not scored?

Second, I have tried this before with surplus Lee Enfield .303 cartridges. It is impossible to make a straight and even cut, even if all one is doing is scoring the tip (and considering the thickness of the 6.5 Carcano jacket, this would have to be a VERY deep score). Although a hit at very close range is possible, accuracy at distances approaching 100 yards suffers accordingly.

Third, was not the intact jacket nose of the bullet that hit JFK's head supposedly found in the front of the limousine?

You are babbling bobby. Try a file next time.

Translated from bobbyspeak...

"I can't deny this so ill spew instead"

[Robert Prudhomme]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

Mr. Lamson

Are you suggesting LHO purposely made a soft point or hollow point bullet by cutting the tip from a full metal jacket bullet?

I hardly think this could be the case, for a number of reasons.

First, the unfired cartridge in LHO's alleged carcano was intact and unmodified, as WC evidence photos will attest. Do you seriously think LHO knew exactly how many rounds he needed and only scored one (or two) of them? Why was CE 399 not scored?

Second, I have tried this before with surplus Lee Enfield .303 cartridges. It is impossible to make a straight and even cut, even if all one is doing is scoring the tip (and considering the thickness of the 6.5 Carcano jacket, this would have to be a VERY deep score). Although a hit at very close range is possible, accuracy at distances approaching 100 yards suffers accordingly.

Third, was not the intact jacket nose of the bullet that hit JFK's head supposedly found in the front of the limousine?

You are babbling bobby. Try a file next time.

Translated from bobbyspeak...

"I can't deny this so ill spew instead"

If the bullet that struck JFK's head was "filed", why was CE 399 and the unfired cartridge found in the 6.5 Carcano not "filed"? Do you seriously believe Oswald knew exactly which bullet was going to strike JFK's head and only "filed" that one?

And have you forgotten that the INTACT jacket nose of the bullet that struck JFK in the head was supposedly found in the front of the limo passenger compartment, completely "unfiled"?

If you do not wish to address these two points, this will be the last time I respond to you on this thread.

Please stop wasting everyone's time.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Craig Lamson]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

Mr. Lamson

Are you suggesting LHO purposely made a soft point or hollow point bullet by cutting the tip from a full metal jacket bullet?

I hardly think this could be the case, for a number of reasons.

First, the unfired cartridge in LHO's alleged carcano was intact and unmodified, as WC evidence photos will attest. Do you seriously think LHO knew exactly how many rounds he needed and only scored one (or two) of them? Why was CE 399 not scored?

Second, I have tried this before with surplus Lee Enfield .303 cartridges. It is impossible to make a straight and even cut, even if all one is doing is scoring the tip (and considering the thickness of the 6.5 Carcano jacket, this would have to be a VERY deep score). Although a hit at very close range is possible, accuracy at distances approaching 100 yards suffers accordingly.

Third, was not the intact jacket nose of the bullet that hit JFK's head supposedly found in the front of the limousine?

You are babbling bobby. Try a file next time.

Translated from bobbyspeak...

"I can't deny this so ill spew instead"

If the bullet that struck JFK's head was "filed", why was CE 399 and the unfired cartridge found in the 6.5 Carcano not filed? Do you seriously believe Oswald knew exactly which bullet was going to strike JFK's head and only "filed" that one?

And have you forgotten that the INTACT jacket nose of the bullet that struck JFK in the head was supposedly found in the front of the limo passenger compartment, completely "unfiled"?

If you do not wish to address these two points, this will be the last time I respond to you on this thread.

Please stop wasting everyone's time.

You are the time waster here bobby. Why not only file one? Would that not have been a BETTER choice than modifying them all?

If the tip was found surely you can produce substantial evidence to support your " supposed"...

Just like the Rather nonsense you posted, here you are again telling us that YOUR expectations are not being met, instead of dealing with the reality that you don't really have the first clue what may or may not have been used.

Pretty much par for the course...

Edited June 1, 2013 by Craig Lamson

[Pat Speer]

Ever score the tip of a fmj Bob...

Mr. Lamson

Are you suggesting LHO purposely made a soft point or hollow point bullet by cutting the tip from a full metal jacket bullet?

I hardly think this could be the case, for a number of reasons.

First, the unfired cartridge in LHO's alleged carcano was intact and unmodified, as WC evidence photos will attest. Do you seriously think LHO knew exactly how many rounds he needed and only scored one (or two) of them? Why was CE 399 not scored?

Second, I have tried this before with surplus Lee Enfield .303 cartridges. It is impossible to make a straight and even cut, even if all one is doing is scoring the tip (and considering the thickness of the 6.5 Carcano jacket, this would have to be a VERY deep score). Although a hit at very close range is possible, accuracy at distances approaching 100 yards suffers accordingly.

Third, was not the intact jacket nose of the bullet that hit JFK's head supposedly found in the front of the limousine?

You are babbling bobby. Try a file next time.

Translated from bobbyspeak...

"I can't deny this so ill spew instead"

If the bullet that struck JFK's head was "filed", why was CE 399 and the unfired cartridge found in the 6.5 Carcano not filed? Do you seriously believe Oswald knew exactly which bullet was going to strike JFK's head and only "filed" that one?

And have you forgotten that the INTACT jacket nose of the bullet that struck JFK in the head was supposedly found in the front of the limo passenger compartment, completely "unfiled"?

If you do not wish to address these two points, this will be the last time I respond to you on this thread.

Please stop wasting everyone's time.

You are the time waster here bobby. Why not only file one? Would that not have been a BETTER choice than modifying them all?

If the tip was found surely you can produce substantial evidence to support your " supposed"...

Just like the Rather nonsense you posted, here you are again telling us that YOUR expectations are not being met, instead of dealing with the reality that you don't really have the first clue what may or may not have been used.

Pretty much par for the course...

It appears, Craig, that you're letting your previous disagreements with Robert drag you onto the wrong side of this discussion.

There is no evidence Oswald scored the bullet creating the head wound.

There is no evidence Oswald thought scoring the bullet would be necessary, or even knew his scoring the bullet would create an explosive wound.

There's also this. The entrance wound on the back of Kennedy's head--whether you believe it to have been in the hairline or in the cowlick--was a through and through wound and NOT the entrance wound of a scored bullet. Everything I've read on wound ballistics--which is quite a lot--indicates that the entrance wounds of scored bullets resemble the entrance wounds of soft-nosed ammunition...big and messy. Do you disagree?

Do you really believe that scored bullets make entrance wounds smaller than the bullet? And, if so, do you have any sources for this information?

[Craig Lamson]

Despite your claims it appears you need more research Pat. The entrance of a scored or cut bullet is big and messy? That's a howler.

This is all about possibilities Pat and since you can't define the actual bullet that struck JFK's head ( let alone a concensus of direction) all the possibilities remain on the table.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Mr. Speer

With all due respect, my experience in hunting has shown me that both soft tipped and hollow point bullets will often make entry wounds no bigger than full metal jacket bullets, ie. no bigger than the actual diameter of the bullet. This is only altered if the bullet begins to tumble, for whatever reason, prior to hitting the target.

What makes it unlikely that Oswald would have altered the tip of the bullet that struck JFK's head is the fact that we know two of the four bullets allegedly in Oswald's possession that day, CE 399 and the unfired cartridge, were not altered. If going for a head shot on the first shot, wouldn't it make sense to alter ALL of the bullets? I believe this is a desperate attempt by a Lone Nut to distract us from the basic reality that a head shot from a 6.5 mm Carcano bullet could not have produced the explosive results seen in z313.

[Craig Lamson]

Poor bobby.

First I'm not ct or ln. At least try and get ONE thing correct.

Second. Your expectations are really quite meaningless.

You don't know and most likely never will. Welcome to reality

The possibility exists for a modified or even damaged bullet.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Mr. Speer

Further to the unlikelihood of only one out of four bullets being altered by Oswald, it must be remembered that damaged or crudely altered bullets are inherently inaccurate, due to the destabilizing and unbalancing effect such damage or alteration has on the in flight characteristics of such a bullet. Also, the amount of accidental "damage" required to put a full metal jacket on par with a hollow point bullet, given the thicker than average jacket of the 6.5 Carcano FMJ bullet, is extremely hard to conceive and would only make sense in the mind of a Lone Nut.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Craig Lamson]

Mr. Speer

Further to the unlikelihood of only one out of four bullets being altered by Oswald, it must be remembered that damaged or crudely altered bullets are inherently inaccurate, due to the destabilizing and unbalancing effect such damage or alteration has on the in flight characteristics of such a bullet. Also, the amount of accidental "damage" required to put a full metal jacket on par with a hollow point bullet, given the thicker than average jacket of the 6.5 Carcano FMJ bullet, is extremely hard to conceive and would only make sense in the mind of a Lone Nut.

Lots of possibilities all of which lay waste to bobby....his "expectations" be damned.

Gotta love YouTube vids that show "crudely modified" rifle projectiles accurate at 250 yards.

How far was it in the plaza?

Edited June 2, 2013 by Craig Lamson

[Robert Prudhomme]

Anyone that bases his research on YouTube videos is a definite believer in junk science.