Yeah, that stock doesn't look right with a M1 carbine.
"Gun Show before the invention of Beef Jerky"
..and cheap gaudy chinese knives and, and aroma therapy candles, and junk 'jewelry', etc...
In another forum some misinformed folks claimed that it is possible to shoot 32 ACP rounds with a Nagant M95 using the original cylinder. I took this pic to prove that no, you can't.
View attachment 1054608
Ammo price and availability differential?The number one question that came to mind for me is why would anybody want to do that? If you were really really desperate, I guess you could get with TK custom moon clips and have some made for the 32 ACP, but again, why?
They are simply working with less than full information. There are/were several makers that have made 32 ACP replacement cylinders for Nagant revolvers. It can be done just not with the original cylinder.The number one question that came to mind for me is why would anybody want to do that? If you were really really desperate, I guess you could get with TK custom moon clips and have some made for the 32 ACP, but again, why?
Ammo price and availability differential?
Noticed this at a Scheels store today... With tax this amounts to over $10 a shell....wow.
View attachment 1055318
That is tungsten shot at a density of 18 g/cc compared to lead at 11 g/cc. That stuff was silly expensive before the Covid/social-unrest issues drove prices on ammo way up. Tungsten goes for roughly 10x the price of lead for the same unit mass
They both have roughly the same density. Depleted uranium does have advantages against hard targets mostly due to its pyrophoric properties (it catches on fire when broken into small pieces) but against soft targets they would both perform nearly the same sans the low-level radiation.Heck with tungsten. I'm holding out for depleted uranium.
That is tungsten shot at a density of 18 g/cc compared to lead at 11 g/cc. That stuff was silly expensive before the Covid/social-unrest issues drove prices on ammo way up. Tungsten goes for roughly 10x the price of lead for the same unit mass
They both have roughly the same density. Depleted uranium does have advantages against hard targets mostly due to its pyrophoric properties (it catches on fire when broken into small pieces) but against soft targets they would both perform nearly the same sans the low-level radiation.
I disagree somewhat. The big advantage of a DU penetrator is that it is self-sharpening instead of getting blunted like other penetrators. The hot spalling effect of any high velocity penetrator that makes it through armor is enough to wreak havoc with the inside of an armored vehicle even without being pyrophoric. Armored vehicles are chock full of all kinds of stuff that react rather badly to being hit by spall, or by the penetrator itself whizzing through.
The other advantage of DU is we have a billion pounds of the stuff just laying around. Of course, there is that pesky radioactivity....
The part most relevant to my early post is the similar density and similar performance on soft targets. In pellet form for a shotgun tungsten works well, from 410 bore, to 10 gauge even up to 120mm and 5-in deck guns. Tungsten is the material of choice for high performance pellets against soft targets.
tuckerdog1
Your Rigarmi Model 53 reminds me a lot of a Sterling Model 302 (.22LR), that I had many years ago. It was made here in the U.S. and was chambered for .25 ACP and .22LR. It was really well made being all steel in it's construction. As much as I liked that little Sterling I never could get it to run right, trying different ammo and magazines to get it to work but it never did. I eventually ended up trading it in on something else.
If you need spare parts or magazines try Bob's Gun Shop Inc. (gun-parts.com), and Numrich Gun Parts Corp. (gunpartscorp.com).