https://imgur.com/a/Juohq6M
https://imgur.com/a/Juohq6M
Full album in the link. Aim point marked in ballpoint pen on the target, utilizing the correct Carcano sight picture at only 15 yards. Ammo is correct sized .268" bullets, 139gn from PPU on my own medium-power handloads. At the bottom of the album is a group from my other cavalry carbine, same ammo, same distance.
Bore didn't look that bad on inspection, pitted all the way down but still had rifling. This rifle was originally a M91 long rifle, but was converted by the arsenal into a carbine before they started producing carbines from scratch. They're known to have some accuracy issues due to the gain-twist rifling being cut short, but 139gn is a lighter bullet than what was originally issued. The barrel crown will swallow the bullet down to just over 1/8" from the cannelure. Looks like the bore is simply too shot out to hit the broad side of a barn. I didn't even try at 50.
In the second group in the album, I actually count seven holes in the target after six rounds fired. I wonder if the bore was so bad that a bullet actually separated, or maybe it took a piece of metal downrange with it. I dunno, after those 12 rounds I was through wasting ammo on it. Date code on the barrel is 1897, it's old even by Carcano standards.
Buds issued a paid shipping label and a full refund, as the guns are now out of stock. But, others of the same TW Imports batch are still floating around. I would probably avoid the ones with long rifle-style rear sights, and instead buy one of the rifles originally built as carbines post-WW1.
https://imgur.com/a/Juohq6M
Full album in the link. Aim point marked in ballpoint pen on the target, utilizing the correct Carcano sight picture at only 15 yards. Ammo is correct sized .268" bullets, 139gn from PPU on my own medium-power handloads. At the bottom of the album is a group from my other cavalry carbine, same ammo, same distance.
Bore didn't look that bad on inspection, pitted all the way down but still had rifling. This rifle was originally a M91 long rifle, but was converted by the arsenal into a carbine before they started producing carbines from scratch. They're known to have some accuracy issues due to the gain-twist rifling being cut short, but 139gn is a lighter bullet than what was originally issued. The barrel crown will swallow the bullet down to just over 1/8" from the cannelure. Looks like the bore is simply too shot out to hit the broad side of a barn. I didn't even try at 50.
In the second group in the album, I actually count seven holes in the target after six rounds fired. I wonder if the bore was so bad that a bullet actually separated, or maybe it took a piece of metal downrange with it. I dunno, after those 12 rounds I was through wasting ammo on it. Date code on the barrel is 1897, it's old even by Carcano standards.
Buds issued a paid shipping label and a full refund, as the guns are now out of stock. But, others of the same TW Imports batch are still floating around. I would probably avoid the ones with long rifle-style rear sights, and instead buy one of the rifles originally built as carbines post-WW1.
