Printable View
A relatve of mine who knows very little about firearms except what he reads & is told by I don`t know who purchased a Remmington 03A3. He wants to shoot it. He was told that you can load up the 5 rounds in the mag well , drop a round in the chamber, push down on the loaded mag & close the bolt on the round that is chamberd. Now you have 6 rounds to rire. Is this true, I never heard of this myself? Thanks in advance.
I've done this but that way it's more trouble than it's worth. It doesn't afford you anything anyway...6 v/s 5?Quote:
Originally Posted by OLDER THEN DIRT
That is what the magazine cutoff is for. The magazine would hold 5 rounds in reserve and the soldier loaded and fired one round at a time. By the the military thought process of that day, the soldier is not wasting ammunition. Kind of like the automatic, 3 round burst, semi auto selector switch controversy from several years ago.
But to answer your question, yes, that can be done.
Oh, by the way, did you know that the US M1917 held six rounds in the magazine? But that's a story for another day.
BEAR (BDY)
Yes, it can.Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAR
Yes, I had several and did it too. Didn't make much difference...Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAR
Like I said, more trouble than it is worth - unless maybe on the battlefield and even then ... :madsmile:
It'd be faster to just snap in another clip of five than mess around...
The Magazine Lee-Metford, Magazine Lee-Enfield, C.L.L.E., S.M.L.E. MkI & MkIII , all had a magazine cut-off until it was eliminated on production of the S.M.L.E. MkIII*, during WW1.
The cut-off reappeared on post WW1 British rifles like the S.M.L.E. Mark V and S.M.L.E. Mark VI (#4 Rifle prototype).
Some ideas seem so good, or at least neutral, that they have a hard time 'dying'.
At least with the U.S. Krag-Jorgensen and British Lee rifles, it was easily visible to the Sergeants, if a man in formation did not have the magazine contents 'blocked off'.
The 1903 and 1903A-3 cut-offs were not so obvious.
Attachment 87896
Actually, with the larger cutoffs of the M1903 and 03A3, I'd argue that the cutoffs were even more obvious than on the Krag. :)
I sort of see it like that too, I think they'd be visible if one looked.
hi, that's an old trick used to do it to my K98's also & my P17 when doing ww2 reenactments
The cutoff was used because the brass didn't trust Pvt Tentpeg with 5 rounds. Such a waste of ammunition was unthinkable. Very similar to the more modern day problem with the "spray and pray" mentality.
Pictures of "spray and pray":
Attachment 87935
Attachment 87936
Oh look...spray and pray in the trenches :lol:
Attachment 87937
BEAR (BDY)
'Bear' - That WW1 'trench shot' is not 'spray and pray'.
It is a Hyposcope equipped rifle, which was a relatively precise way to shoot without being exposed. The sights are used with a periscope like arrangement.
---------- Post added at 02:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:58 PM ----------
FWIW - The U.S. Krag 'cut-off switch' had polished bare metal in sight, when the 'cut-off' lever was in the repeater or feed position. When the rifles were young, it probably looked like a mirror.
It was a joke
That fella in the trench with that pig sticker on his right hip, is that a smart way to carry a knife like that? Seems like it could go bad even though it's more than likely in a scabbard.
Just noticed it reading and looking. Apologies for being off topic.
Those had a steel scabbard that had little clips to hold them in place. They were meant to be carried exactly like that. It does have a scabbard on it, I'm confident.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doco overboard