Original thread title: "Initial firing test of TS 8mm carcano (long)"
Frank
Posted - 12/28/2003 : 8:08:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had some spare time this afternoon, so I finally gave my TS 8mm it's first fing test. Short report: it is going to be a good shooter. Long report: After careful reading of the recent discussions concerning these carbines, I decide to approach this project with caution. Also,not having any 8mm head space gauges I proceeded with the following.
After selecting some once fired US commercial 8mm Mauser cases that were a slightly tight fit in the Carcano's chamber, I neck sized the cases and loaded them with the minimum load for IMR 4895 powder and Speer .321 170 grain bullets. This load approximates the US commercial loading which is mild due to all the Model 88 Commission rifles still around plus other liability concerns. Six suitable cartridges were produced that would just close with slight extra bolt pressure (with the firing pin removed from the bolt).
Thus, I proceeded about a mile into the woods behind my house. Air temperature about 8 degrees F. with 8 inches of snow. I did not want to upset the local cross country skiers !! Tied the carbine to a tree while aimed at a safe back stop. Using a long string plus eye protection, I fired the first round which was a US commercial cartridge just to see if the carbine was going to hold together. Everything checked OK with a little brass expansion at the base but with easy extraction. Next, three rounds of the reloads where fired with the rifle still tied to the tree. Normal function and extraction with normal expansion at the base of the brass (less than with the commercial load). Next three reloads were fired offhand at 50 yards producing a 3 inch group at point of aim using the Italian sight picture (front sight low in rear vee notch).
Conclusions: This particular rifle functions OK with reloads equivalent to US commercial loads. Accuracy appears good from this short test. Next: continue testing with fire formed mild reloads and various brands of US commercial ammunition to see which gives the best accuracy. I do not plan to test this rifle to destruction; but will fire some military surplus cartridges in the next testing later this week, just to know the results.
Frank
woettinger
Posted - 12/30/2003 : 8:53:47 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kewl.. Keep us informed
Emperor
Posted - 12/31/2003 : 10:31:36 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week I finally shot my 8mm purchased from Springfield Sporters before they closed. After all the discussion, it was a little scary. But it didn't blow up on the first shot so I tried a few more.
The problem I was having was extracting the fired shell. I had to pound the bolt handle against the wooden table to move it back. Each time I did this the extractor would get pulled out of the bolt. To get the shell out of the chamber, I had use a cleaning rod pushed down the barrel. Needless to say, I didn't miss not having an 8mm clip to hold more cartridges in the magazine! After about five tries, I was done.
What is the solution to this problem, polishing the chamber?
Carcano
Posted - 12/31/2003 : 10:33:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emperor: what ammo were you using ?
Emperor
Posted - 01/01/2004 : 7:24:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ammo was some German 8mm that I got from J&G. It is very clean on the outside, I think dated 1939.
I have not cleaned up and tried any of the recent 8mm rifles I purchased from Century during their special. It will be interesting to see if the extractors on those are a little more secure.
Carcano
Posted - 01/03/2004 : 1:45:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emperor: your ammo is part of the problem. While I will concede that a decently-made gun "should" digest 8mm milsurp without any problem, we have counselled time and again against such practice...
I did test fire another Moschetto TS 38 "S" today (serial no. 189 on barrel and RA 189 on buttstock, marked 7.9 on rear sight). The extraction was absolutely smooth and flawless, and accuracy at 50 metres was a truly delightful surprise (I fired from about 16.00-17.00 hours, with already waning light). I used Igman, Remington and Winchester ammo.
Hambone
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 10:11:29 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Emperor's problem is the ammo, and the ammo he was using was standard German WW2 issue 8mm, then what was the TS 8mm designed to fire? There has long been speculation that a reduced loading was required, but wouldn't that defeat the purpose (i.e., interchangeability) of the 8mm chambering in the first place? Troops in the field don't have the luxury of reloaders, chronographs, digital powder scales, and time to custom tailor specific loads to individual rifles. My extraction problems were exactly those described with three kinds of 8mm surplus.
Carcano
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 10:47:39 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The observation of Hambone is justified; I am not aware of any "reduced" 8mm loadings, apart from the (rare) civilian Norwegian 8mm load for converted Krag rifles. This conversion is - as many converted weapons are - not one of the best: just see the rather crudely drilled chambers of many.
My previous 8mm carbine had very hard extraction with the Portuguese FNM ammo. The latest one of yesterday (serial no. 189 / RA 189) I have not yet fired with surplus, but its accuracy was surprising: I managed to fire a 0.5" inch group of three shots at 50 metres with Remington SP, but the waning light made the five-shot group open up, since I was not able to align the front sight properly anymore. Five earlier shots of Igman 170 gr SP ammo had grouped at 1.25" x 2" at 50 metres, which is not too bad either: well, non of my guns shoots better with Igman, so it's about the optimum that can be achieved.
The full-power Igman shot 15" high, while the milder Remington was only 2" high at 50 metres - which tells us something about the different muzzle velocity.
carlnpa
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 1:15:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have four of these all with rough chambers and believe this may have been done intentionally. These rifles were all finished with care in many other areas. I would not smooth out the chambers as I think this very roughness significantly reduces the load on the bolt.
Carcano
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 2:52:10 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Scratches head*
Yes, carlnpa - that indeed was my initial assumption too (as witnessed in some olden postings of mine to rec.guns, in the Gun & Knife fora and elsewhere). But I am not so sure anymore whether I was right there. Might still be.
Kivaari
Posted - 01/11/2004 : 3:56:04 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank
Interesting proofing technique...:^)
Frank
Posted - 12/28/2003 : 8:08:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had some spare time this afternoon, so I finally gave my TS 8mm it's first fing test. Short report: it is going to be a good shooter. Long report: After careful reading of the recent discussions concerning these carbines, I decide to approach this project with caution. Also,not having any 8mm head space gauges I proceeded with the following.
After selecting some once fired US commercial 8mm Mauser cases that were a slightly tight fit in the Carcano's chamber, I neck sized the cases and loaded them with the minimum load for IMR 4895 powder and Speer .321 170 grain bullets. This load approximates the US commercial loading which is mild due to all the Model 88 Commission rifles still around plus other liability concerns. Six suitable cartridges were produced that would just close with slight extra bolt pressure (with the firing pin removed from the bolt).
Thus, I proceeded about a mile into the woods behind my house. Air temperature about 8 degrees F. with 8 inches of snow. I did not want to upset the local cross country skiers !! Tied the carbine to a tree while aimed at a safe back stop. Using a long string plus eye protection, I fired the first round which was a US commercial cartridge just to see if the carbine was going to hold together. Everything checked OK with a little brass expansion at the base but with easy extraction. Next, three rounds of the reloads where fired with the rifle still tied to the tree. Normal function and extraction with normal expansion at the base of the brass (less than with the commercial load). Next three reloads were fired offhand at 50 yards producing a 3 inch group at point of aim using the Italian sight picture (front sight low in rear vee notch).
Conclusions: This particular rifle functions OK with reloads equivalent to US commercial loads. Accuracy appears good from this short test. Next: continue testing with fire formed mild reloads and various brands of US commercial ammunition to see which gives the best accuracy. I do not plan to test this rifle to destruction; but will fire some military surplus cartridges in the next testing later this week, just to know the results.
Frank
woettinger
Posted - 12/30/2003 : 8:53:47 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kewl.. Keep us informed
Emperor
Posted - 12/31/2003 : 10:31:36 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week I finally shot my 8mm purchased from Springfield Sporters before they closed. After all the discussion, it was a little scary. But it didn't blow up on the first shot so I tried a few more.
The problem I was having was extracting the fired shell. I had to pound the bolt handle against the wooden table to move it back. Each time I did this the extractor would get pulled out of the bolt. To get the shell out of the chamber, I had use a cleaning rod pushed down the barrel. Needless to say, I didn't miss not having an 8mm clip to hold more cartridges in the magazine! After about five tries, I was done.
What is the solution to this problem, polishing the chamber?
Carcano
Posted - 12/31/2003 : 10:33:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emperor: what ammo were you using ?
Emperor
Posted - 01/01/2004 : 7:24:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ammo was some German 8mm that I got from J&G. It is very clean on the outside, I think dated 1939.
I have not cleaned up and tried any of the recent 8mm rifles I purchased from Century during their special. It will be interesting to see if the extractors on those are a little more secure.
Carcano
Posted - 01/03/2004 : 1:45:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emperor: your ammo is part of the problem. While I will concede that a decently-made gun "should" digest 8mm milsurp without any problem, we have counselled time and again against such practice...
I did test fire another Moschetto TS 38 "S" today (serial no. 189 on barrel and RA 189 on buttstock, marked 7.9 on rear sight). The extraction was absolutely smooth and flawless, and accuracy at 50 metres was a truly delightful surprise (I fired from about 16.00-17.00 hours, with already waning light). I used Igman, Remington and Winchester ammo.
Hambone
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 10:11:29 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Emperor's problem is the ammo, and the ammo he was using was standard German WW2 issue 8mm, then what was the TS 8mm designed to fire? There has long been speculation that a reduced loading was required, but wouldn't that defeat the purpose (i.e., interchangeability) of the 8mm chambering in the first place? Troops in the field don't have the luxury of reloaders, chronographs, digital powder scales, and time to custom tailor specific loads to individual rifles. My extraction problems were exactly those described with three kinds of 8mm surplus.
Carcano
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 10:47:39 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The observation of Hambone is justified; I am not aware of any "reduced" 8mm loadings, apart from the (rare) civilian Norwegian 8mm load for converted Krag rifles. This conversion is - as many converted weapons are - not one of the best: just see the rather crudely drilled chambers of many.
My previous 8mm carbine had very hard extraction with the Portuguese FNM ammo. The latest one of yesterday (serial no. 189 / RA 189) I have not yet fired with surplus, but its accuracy was surprising: I managed to fire a 0.5" inch group of three shots at 50 metres with Remington SP, but the waning light made the five-shot group open up, since I was not able to align the front sight properly anymore. Five earlier shots of Igman 170 gr SP ammo had grouped at 1.25" x 2" at 50 metres, which is not too bad either: well, non of my guns shoots better with Igman, so it's about the optimum that can be achieved.
The full-power Igman shot 15" high, while the milder Remington was only 2" high at 50 metres - which tells us something about the different muzzle velocity.
carlnpa
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 1:15:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have four of these all with rough chambers and believe this may have been done intentionally. These rifles were all finished with care in many other areas. I would not smooth out the chambers as I think this very roughness significantly reduces the load on the bolt.
Carcano
Posted - 01/04/2004 : 2:52:10 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Scratches head*
Yes, carlnpa - that indeed was my initial assumption too (as witnessed in some olden postings of mine to rec.guns, in the Gun & Knife fora and elsewhere). But I am not so sure anymore whether I was right there. Might still be.
Kivaari
Posted - 01/11/2004 : 3:56:04 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank
Interesting proofing technique...:^)
