7 Attachment(s)
Help me identify my model of carcano
I recently bought this Italian Carcano. The stock was broke in half, that is why I painted it. It does not look as bad as the photos show. The smudges are fingerprints. This is a neat little rifle. It is very short, about the length of a stock ruger 10/22. I took some pictures of it.
I bought this because I like military rifles, and this is by far the shortest vintage milsurp rifle ever. Someone told me that they think it is a shortened rifle, but I don't see how that would work as it still has its bayonet lug. My guess is that it is a Calvary Carbine model.... What do you think?
Also is there any way to adjust the sights? At 20 yards I was 5 inches up, and 5 inches left. A grouping of 10 bullets was 1-1/4 inches in the top left corner. That's decent for a little guy :) If no adjustments can be made I may slightly file down the rear sight to at least get it level...
The only thing this rifle is missing is the trapdoor.... :( Does anyone have one to donate? :help:
This rifle was fun to shoot, except for having to pull the bolt off every time to load (I dont have a stripper clip). This is the only rifle I've shot where the bullet actually loads through notches in the bottom of the bolt, so you cannot just chamber a round and close the bolt. The bullets are approx $1.20 each, so not a great beginner rifle, or primary rifle at the range. This rifle had very little kick (I was suprised). If you find a decent one around $100 get it.... If you dont mind the ammo bill :eek:
3 Attachment(s)
Fine sighting and the Carcano
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DocAV
Correct Carcano sighting: The top of the front sight blade has to be in the very bottom of the "V"...NOT your usual US or Anglo sighting Picture. IN otherwords, you see Most of the Target in the "V", for correct fixed range ( 200 metres) sighting with a M38 Fixed rear sight.
Thanks for the contribution, but isn't that just what has already been shown in the drawing which jmoore extracted from the archives?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DocAV
As the " trajectory" is virtually horizontal at 200 metres ( effectively "Point Blank") ...
...one can only use "fine sighting" at ranges much greater than 200-300 metres...
That is just not so. Raising or lowering the target in the aperture raises or lowers the sight line by a certain angle, and that has nothing to do with the distance. And has nothing to do with the flatness of the trajectory - which, BTW, is not horizontal, all shots exhibit a certain amount of drop, and a Carcano is no 22-250.
To put some figures into the argument, I took some photos of my Fucile 91/41. The dimensions may be different for the Moschetto, but I'm sure jmoore can supply the values for that model. The argument remains the same.
Attachment 39326
As you can see, the V on the fixed backsight is generous. It measures (near enough) 2.2mm wide and 2.2mm deep. (Jmoore - please compare with the Moschetto)
With your eye about 35 cm (i.e. 1/3 meter) from the backsight - hardly closer unless you like getting your cheek banged by the bolt - the apparent size of an 8"/200 mm black at 100 meters will be 200 x 0.35 / 100 = 0.7 mm. Even smaller than in my drawing, in fact.
The adjustable range for the center of the black - from level with the top of the V to just sitting on the bottom is thus
2.2 - 0.5x0.7 = 2.2 - 0.35 = 1.85 mm
The sight radius is 58 cm. So shifting the foresight vertically by 0.58 mm with respect to the backsight V will alter the POI by about 4 MOA regardless of the target distance.
The total V depth on the fixed sight therefore covers a range of 15 MOA.
Fine sighting is not an option. It is a necessity. And, I submit, this deep V would not have been required unless fine sighting was also intended.
On the Moschetto, the shortened sight radius will make the effect even greater. The result will be a range of something like 18-20 MOA.
Looking at the flip-up sight leaf, we can see that the V is even deeper.
Attachment 39325
Yes, even deeper than on a Martini-Henry, the sight picture of which an acquaintance described as "looking at the Great Pyramid through a railway cutting". In the case of the Carcano, it is like looking through the Corinth Canal - very, very deep. My example measures 3mm wide by 4 mm deep. Using the same calculation method as before, this covers a range of
4 -0.35 = 3.65mm, or a whopping great 30 MOA - twice as much as for the fixed sight
And once again, I submit that this apparently grotesque depth would not be necessary unless fine sighting were intended.
The fixed sight of the Moschetto has been laughed at by shooters spoilt by the luxury of more modern sights with vertical and horizontal adjustment. But using fine sighting, and with, it must be admitted, practice of a kind which most shooters no longer undertake, this method was perfectly adequate over the ranges at which the Moschetto was expected to be used. And in the 19th century (see the "Regulations for Conducting Musketry Instructions of the Army", from 1859) it was the standard method for all shooters using rifles with simple backsight leaf steps, and no continuous adjustment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DocAV
If constrained to load without a clip, the cartridge must be laid in the boltway,
You are quite correct to say that this is desirable. But how practical is it?
Attachment 39324
Take a look at the above photo. The elevator does not have even a hint of a loading tray.
Have you tried it yourself? On the firing point? For a full string?
Since the cartridge will not balance on the elevator if you dare to breathe, you have to push it forwards until the bullet nose is just on the ramp - not too far, otherwise the rising effect is lost - and then push the bolt forwards WITHOUT DISTURBING THE CARTRIDGE.
Well I did try it. And although I am a cautious, sometimes even picky person in the handling of rifles, I very soon gave up and just banged the cartridges in. And got hold of a clip a.s.a.p.
The clip is the only long-term answer unless one wants to suffers endless annoyance or (yes, you are right!) bang up the case rims. Or rebuild the magazine section - I have heard of this being done, but not seen the results.
P.S. If my maths is off-target, I would be grateful for a friendly correction!
