So you can not look at real guns or bullets ? Some of what they say does not even make sense . The experts said the stripper clip guides are riveted on even though there is no through hole and rivets work by compression . Even though I knocked a guide off a rifle and the weld was clear . What documentation do you need for that ? Why would you need to " reshape " a .3208 bullet to fit a .3208 groove barrel ? BECAUSE you think the rifles have .318 barrels and the S bullet was .323 , both easy to check . The 05 notch was cut for the LONGER S ammo ?? , again just put a S round next to a P-88 round to see your are wrong . Why is a Z barrel a .323 groove if you just measure a bunch ? Several of your article and book writers did no research and just did their interpretation of other bad info . Yes I have friends who have original documents and have looked at more in Germany and they have shared that printed info with me that I match to REAL rifles . Their info and my rifles match up every time . So if you want to think you have a .318 barrel , a riveted guide or a .001 rebored barrel that is fine . But no one else that checks will have them . If you check , your real rifle will match up to what I say . Also It would be a very BAD idea to shoot S&B spce ammo in a .3208 groove gew-88 no matter what the guy says about N.M. barrels . I also have real rifles with and without N.M. barrels that disproves what he said . I have no children and will have no say on where all my stuff ends up , nor will I care by then . I did share info to keep the guy from firing the wrong ammo in his rifle , and told why it was wrong . I shared the Czech small barrel info with everyone when I found it . I shared the info on what really was a Gew-88S and how to tell , when about every one of your US writers had it wrong [ like the video guy ] . Why does a 1918 Gew-98 have the S stamp if it just means a recut for S ? Yes I have 2 Gew-88/05's with the original rear sights on them , they also disprove some of the stuff printed by people .
You are completely missing my point, and have every time I have attempted to make it. Whoever has wronged or slighted you in regards to Gewehr 88's is NOT ME. You are having some argument with people that are not present. I will endeavor one more time to try and make my point with you, and will speak my peace as they say.
So you can not look at real guns or bullets ?
On the contrary, empirical evidence is paramount in any of our studies. Time and again, primary documents have been shown to be in error. However you have to PRESENT or share that empirical evidence. For example, and not totally unrelated to our topic, the Karabiner 88 front band. Storz was kind enough to put this original drawing in his book. This is the drawing I used as a basis to machine new replacement front bands or "nosecaps" as they are called. The drawing is wrong. But I cannot simply tell people that the drawing is wrong, I have to present my empirical evidence to SHOW how it is wrong. So in this case, I could show photographs of several screws that were measured using an optical comparator to show that the screws are not in fact a whitworth thread, but actually a 60 degree metric thread. Providing additional numbers to show a variety of samples would pretty well prove the point. Simply claiming that I know more than the experts does not prove them wrong.
The experts said the stripper clip guides are riveted on even though there is no through hole and rivets work by compression . Even though I knocked a guide off a rifle and the weld was clear . What documentation do you need for that ?
Great, show pictures! Why don't you present that? Simple easy task to present and show that while "accepted" knowledge may claim one thing, clearly there are contrary examples.
Why would you need to " reshape " a .3208 bullet to fit a .3208 groove barrel ? BECAUSE you think the rifles have .318 barrels and the S bullet was .323 , both easy to check
As you said, you do not need to. If the rifle has a .306/.318 land groove dimension, it will not chamber a .323 cartridge regardless, and you'd have to be daft to force the bolt closed. The results when you do are surprising.
The 05 notch was cut for the LONGER S ammo ?? , again just put a S round next to a P-88 round to see your are wrong .
But clearly the cut was made, and as frugal and fastidious as the Germans were I cannot imagine them doing extra work for no reason. What was the reason?
Why is a Z barrel a .323 groove if you just measure a bunch ?
You said you own hundred(s) of Gewehr 88 in a previous message on Gunboards, and you have claimed to have slugged the majority of them. Why don't you post the maker/year/serial/markings and the bore dimensions. That would very easily correlate and prove your point.
Several of your article and book writers did no research and just did their interpretation of other bad info . Yes I have friends who have original documents and have looked at more in Germany and they have shared that printed info with me that I match to REAL rifles . Their info and my rifles match up every time .
This brings me back to you being slighted or insulted because I really don't know what articles and book writers you are referring to. The only work on the 88 that I know of is the work by Storz. There are a few other bookstore topical books I have seen, but hardly what one would call scholarly or academic. To claim that Storz did no research is, well, laughable. If you have friends with original documents, and you have access to more in Germany, and that documentation matches up with the REAL rifles, then it is an easy case to make. Simply present the documents along with the findings from the real rifles. To me that sounds like a pretty straight forward case.
So if you want to think you have a .318 barrel , a riveted guide or a .001 rebored barrel that is fine . But no one else that checks will have them . If you check , your real rifle will match up to what I say .
I don't need to think on thing or another, when I can know, through measuring. Again, however, if I argue a point contrary to or even as the accepted opinion, I still present evidence to prove my point. No one will take my word simply because I say it.
Also It would be a very BAD idea to shoot S&B spce ammo in a .3208 groove gew-88 no matter what the guy says about N.M. barrels . I also have real rifles with and without N.M. barrels that disproves what he said .
Having rifles marked nm and rifles that are not marked nm does not disprove what he says.
In general, G 88 with a stronger barrel, marked n.m. (neu material) are approved by state testing in Europe for the use of 8x57JS ammunition according to CIP standards.
If you have evidence, either through primary source documents, or through other empirical evidence to show that the n.m. markings were not a new material that was stronger, then please, share it!
I did share info to keep the guy from firing the wrong ammo in his rifle , and told why it was wrong . I shared the Czech small barrel info with everyone when I found it . I shared the info on what really was a Gew-88S and how to tell , when about every one of your US writers had it wrong [ like the video guy ] .
You haven't shared any info. That is the point. You have shared that everyone else is wrong and you are the only one who is right. You continually refuse to show how and why. Every time you post on gunboards and now here it is a contentious argument which you refuse to share any of your evidence. It is nauseating.
Why does a 1918 Gew-98 have the S stamp if it just means a recut for S ?
Then prove them wrong and show WHY.....
Yes I have 2 Gew-88/05's with the original rear sights on them , they also disprove some of the stuff printed by people .
I have no idea what this is in reference to.
I am in the process or doing an extensive amount of research on Mauser rifles heat treat and metallurgy. It is astounding the amount of wrong information available. The frustrating thing is, it was all done almost 50 years ago. All of that information has been lost. The person who did the research cut up allegedly hundreds of Mauser rifles to determine their metallurgy and heat treatment. He had some original documents and allegedly even spoke with some people who had immigrated to the US post WWII who had worked at companies who produced Mauser rifles. My time is extremely valuable and I hate wasting it. I furthermore hate wasting it on something that someone else has already done. If you have all the necessary evidence to prove your points then present it and be done.