Reversing Rifle Bullets to Increase Penetration?

[Chris Boonzaier]

There is no evidence that dum dums were used in the 2nd Boer (South African) War. There were accusations that the British were using such bullets (mainly voiced by anti British elements in the USA - some of these were repeated almost verbatim in an Irish Republican web site this year) In fact all soft point and hollow point rounds were withdrawn from the country by the British Army, however jacketed rounds were supplied to some troops from the manufacturary at Dum Dum, these were no different from jacketed bullets from any other source but the name on the ammo boxes raised the rumour (a bit of a PR own goal by the British Army). The Boers broke a number of the conventions of warfare of the time but I've seen no accusations of the use of dum dums.

I have a British Dum Dum found on the colesburg battlefield.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...50&start=50

It was in a bucket of regular 303 found in a British position.

I was told it was a civilian dum-dum... but seems to have been carried by British soldiers.

I have absolutely no doubt German/British/French soldiers killing time in the Trenches made all kinds of gruesome toys.

I remember the months leading up to Desert Storm... we spent ages and ages killing time... and the devil does make work for idle hands.

I think we were way better trained than the average WW1 recruit, knew a lot more about our weapons.... but when I think back on some of the silly ideas and experiments!!!

A fool filing flat noses onto a clip of 5.56,, tracers included.

Guys being dissapointed as they only had one heavy defensive grenade and 2 light offensive ones (with a thin tin covering)... and the resulting experiments to make them more effective for blearing bunkers...

off hand I remember guys

1) putting an offensive in a glass jar with a mixture of slivers of the aluminum cut from alcohol free beer tins and broken glass

2) Taping the heads of 4 ot 5 explosive heads from Russian 14.5mm machine gun rounds around the grenade

3) Using the outer cover from American MREs to fill up with bits of cut up barbed wire to make a kind of nail bomd.

In the end I dont think any of these were used.... but if would have confused a battlefield archaeologist or any friends of "absolutes" when it comes to "They always did... or never did" arguments.

You had millions of men with plenty of time on their hands... i am sure trench art is not the only thing they did in off moments in the trenches....

[centurion]

I have a British Dum Dum found on the colesburg battlefield.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...50&start=50

It was in a bucket of regular 303 found in a British position.

Your two postings are at odds. In the original one you said that there was a bucket of rounds collected from the battle field over the years (which makes them worthless as evidence of anything as they could have come from anywhere and been used by either side or not even been left there during the battle at all). In this posting you are saying that they were found in a British position!

[Chris Boonzaier]

Hi,

I got the bullet (and 4-5 regular ones about 30 years ago from a lady at the Colesburg museum.

In the storeroom of the museum was a container filled with battlefield debris that was not on display. This included many rounds of 303, remains of shells etc. All in very weathered condition, the 303 rounds in a strange uniform chocolate brown weathered condition. The chance of it being added or dropped at a later date are very unlikely indeed.

The nature of the fighting in the Colesburg area makes it very unlikely that a Boer dropped this. The Boers marched in very early in the war, the British soon pushed then out again. At this stage the Boers were equipped with Mausers and odds and sods. 303s only began to appear in the Boer ranks much later as Mauser ammunition became scarce and young recruits needed weapons. In January 1900 this was veeery unlikely. Even if at this early stage of the war a Boer captured a 303... what are the chances that he just happened to have some British commercial ammunition along with him? Usually when you take a captured weapon it is to use the captured ammunition.

Somewhere on the forum on a different thread someone identified this as a British commercial round due to the head stamps.

Best

Chris

[centurion]

Hi,

I got the bullet (and 4-5 regular ones about 30 years ago from a lady at the Colesburg museum.

In the storeroom of the museum was a container filled with battlefield debris that was not on display. This included many rounds of 303, remains of shells etc. All in very weathered condition, the 303 rounds in a strange uniform chocolate brown weathered condition. The chance of it being added or dropped at a later date are very unlikely indeed.

The nature of the fighting in the Colesburg area makes it very unlikely that a Boer dropped this. The Boers marched in very early in the war, the British soon pushed then out again. At this stage the Boers were equipped with Mausers and odds and sods. 303s only began to appear in the Boer ranks much later as Mauser ammunition became scarce and young recruits needed weapons. In January 1900 this was veeery unlikely. Even if at this early stage of the war a Boer captured a 303... what are the chances that he just happened to have some British commercial ammunition along with him? Usually when you take a captured weapon it is to use the captured ammunition.

Somewhere on the forum on a different thread someone identified this as a British commercial round due to the head stamps.

Best

Chris

And what are the chances it was dropped by some hunter after the battle? Commercial dum dums were used for hunting. For that matter why would a British soldier have a commercial round amidst all the official issue. The problem is you just can't know if there is no evidence of exactly where it was found and in association with what.

The original thread no longer has the photo - was this a dum dum as manufactured (ie a soft point) or a bullet that had been tampered with?

[Chris Boonzaier]

And what are the chances it was dropped by some hunter after the battle? Commercial dum dums were used for hunting. For that matter why would a British soldier have a commercial round amidst all the official issue.

Hi,

The condition of the regular rounds and the dum dum were identical. There was an extreme amount of weathering.

That a hunter dropped it soon after the war and that it weathered to the same degree is of course possible.... but unlikely.

Colesburg is pretty isolated.

I tend to think it was a soldier who wanted to play silly bggers. There are many things in the pockets of soldiers that would confuse the most serious of battlefield detectives.

I do not suggest the British were issuing these but as this article suggests... boys will be boys...

http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol062jc.html

[truthergw]

I have a British Dum Dum found on the colesburg battlefield.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...50&start=50

....................

You had millions of men with plenty of time on their hands... i am sure trench art is not the only thing they did in off moments in the trenches....

I think I agree with the spirit of this post. This was the sort of thing I was thinking about when I talked of bravado. With the number of men involved over a period of 4 years, commercial availability of dum dum and so on, put it all together and it would be very strange if some men did not tamper with ammunition. By its very nature, this activity was never going to be documented officially except in the case of a man being had up for damaging government property. That seems not to have happened. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that men probably did reverse rounds and they probably were used. Sheer curiosity would ensure that. I am sceptical of the idea that only Germans tampered with issue ammunition. Centurion's data suggests that it was confined to the early years. I find that intriguing and wonder why.

[Rob Connolly]

I remember the months leading up to Desert Storm... we spent ages and ages killing time... and the devil does make work for idle hands. I think we were way better trained than the average WW1 recruit, knew a lot more about our weapons.... but when I think back on some of the silly ideas and experiments!!!

A fool filing flat noses onto a clip of 5.56,, tracers included.

Guys being dissapointed as they only had one heavy defensive grenade and 2 light offensive ones (with a thin tin covering)... and the resulting experiments to make them more effective for blearing bunkers...

off hand I remember guys

1) putting an offensive in a glass jar with a mixture of slivers of the aluminum cut from alcohol free beer tins and broken glass

2) Taping the heads of 4 ot 5 explosive heads from Russian 14.5mm machine gun rounds around the grenade

3) Using the outer cover from American MREs to fill up with bits of cut up barbed wire to make a kind of nail bomd.

You had millions of men with plenty of time on their hands... i am sure trench art is not the only thing they did in off moments in the trenches....

Er - you were on our side, weren't you?

I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the power of Urban Legend vis a vis our chaps in the trenches. Which is to say, it may not be true but an awful lot of people believe in it.

If it gets about that Feldwebel Schmidt blew a hole in a French armoured plate and sniper to boot, a hole "big enough to put a fist through", at five hundred metres distance, that the victim's widow "asked for a closed casket", etc etc, then a certain proportion of those who listen may adopt the Reversed Rifle Round, especially if their mates do at the time. Eventually, as the RRR proves to be less than effective, it's adherents die out and so does the practice. Since we are talking 191*, with no internet this Urban Legend has no legs and dies the death pretty quickly.

My 5p worth.

[MikB]

I am sceptical of the idea that only Germans tampered with issue ammunition. Centurion's data suggests that it was confined to the early years. I find that intriguing and wonder why.

As discussed in earlier posts:- with British service ammunition such modification was very difficult, with French it was largely pointless (no pun intended, but accepted when it came along ), so that really does leave German as the only type for which this was a practical mod.

But I believe sufficiently in the sense of honour most soldiers of the time on all sides would've taken for granted as part of their psychological background, to think that the purpose would more likely've been to penetrate or remove cover than to cause gratuitously gruesome wounds.

Regards,

MikB

[centurion]

I've picked up some detail from an New Zealand medic who found reversed rounds on German prisoners. I won't go into details now (I want my bed) but it seems that reversing a British round would require some serious tools not generaly available to the average front line soldier. As far as the French are concerned there was no point with their kind of ammo (no pun intended). But it was relatively easy to do with the German round.

There is some evidence that the Turks used reversed rounds as well.

[gew98]

Incidentally, to answer some previous comments, it seems that it was possible to use the magazine if you didn't mind having to knock the bolt down with a stick (or a kick from a boot) when it stuck as it very frequently did. For some reason the Nagant M1891 was a much better rifle for using clips of reversed rounds (and I've seen a suggestion that captured Nagants may have been used for this purpose). The bulging of the bore appears to be caused by lead from the unjacketed blunt end being deposited in the lands and building up so that as more rounds are fired there is more pressure on the side of the barrel. It wouldn't happen immediately.

The bulging - it's cause in the scenario with turned turtle S patronen in a gew98 was not from anything remotely like "lead" buildup. Such a thing would be about impossible as the steel jacket securely held the lead in place , looking at the base of an S patrone projectile would show this quite apparent.

The bulging was caused by the pulled bullet falling from the case and lodging in the throat of the barrel - where the rifling starts. Thus separated from the case it exposes a portion of the actual barrel to forces not intended when the rifle is fired - causing a bulge just behind the bullet.This would happen immeadiately. A more clear example of how a bulge is created in any rifle barrel is imagining a bullet stuck anywhere down the bore. And if another round is fired it's bullet when it hits the stuck bullet will momentarily be stopped and cause a pressure spike directly behind it - almost always bulging the barrel at that point.

Where did you get the story of the german used M91's being preferred for use with turned turtle bullets ?. As I collect primarily rifles of the great war and data about them - that's a fisr for me. The majority of german troops using suchreissued foreign rifles on the western front were almost always landwehr and rear echelon troops. These would be the last guys in the world wanting to be uppity by doing such things.

Even if the action of the M91 lends itself to a better chance of feeding turned bullet rounds you still have to contend with these now loose bullets either being knocked or falling back into the case or the bore.

[gew98]

I've picked up some detail from an New Zealand medic who found reversed rounds on German prisoners. I won't go into details now (I want my bed) but it seems that reversing a British round would require some serious tools not generaly available to the average front line soldier. As far as the French are concerned there was no point with their kind of ammo (no pun intended). But it was relatively easy to do with the German round.

There is some evidence that the Turks used reversed rounds as well.

About anyone with a way to put a hole in a board can fashion a kinetic bullet puller , and with a sound rap on a rock or such a bullet will be separated form the case , but I'd wager few troops would have known this then.

As well to note alot of the wartime made small arms ammo by all countries was of a rather lower quality brass - often not annealed. The lower quality raw material and not being annealed to facilitate higher production would leave the brass case stressed and 'hard' ( somewhat akin to brittle ). As it sat in storage the case necks would split - sometimes right off , mostly down the road over time.

[59165]

Guys being dissapointed as they only had one heavy defensive grenade and 2 light offensive ones (with a thin tin covering)... and the resulting experiments to make them more effective for blearing bunkers...

Chris,

that's a great story but,I'm no expert,I thought that defensive grenades were the smaller ones?

As in,if you had to defend your own trench,a smaller charge would benefit your own troops in the vicinity.

On an African adventure,I saw 'reversed' dustbin lids with 2 bricks of C4 spread on with all sorts of glass,nuts n bolts placed in the charge.

Massive claymore,put on a clay or earth bank.It was callrd an 'arc on ciel' 'cos it killed every living bird in a tree or in the sky for 180 degrees

Respect to all,

Dave.

[Gunner Bailey]

Dave

That was one hell of a safari. What travel agent do you use?

John

[David Filsell]

Two stories from men who served in Northern Ireland. One a para sniper, standing nearby, was wryly smiling when I discussed this thread amongst the snoutcasts having a crafty drag between sessions at a meeting. When I asked if he had heard of this technique stated that he had and new of its effcts. He added nothing else. Another, from a RM commando told me that he knew of cases when the projectile was removed from the baton round and a couple of AAA batteries added to the charge. Anecdotal certainly, but it adds to the point that soldiers will do many things when they are bored or want to increase the "effectiveness" of their weaponary on those seeking to kill them.

[Chris Boonzaier]

Chris,

that's a great story but,I'm no expert,I thought that defensive grenades were the smaller ones?

As in,if you had to defend your own trench,a smaller charge would benefit your own troops in the vicinity.

On an African adventure,I saw 'reversed' dustbin lids with 2 bricks of C4 spread on with all sorts of glass,nuts n bolts placed in the charge.

Massive claymore,put on a clay or earth bank.It was callrd an 'arc on ciel' 'cos it killed every living bird in a tree or in the sky for 180 degrees

Respect to all,

Dave.

Hi

the Defensive and offensive are about the same size. You can see the two together in this pic taken in Kinshasa.

The grenade with the rim is the offensive.

You can imagine how difficult it is to attach anything to these. It was watching guys trying to tie, glue and stick things to these strange shaped things... it often makes me wonder how the Germans managed to tie together stick grenade heads without them slipping off.

The Defensive one is a thick skinned one, it is meant to be thrown from a position where you are snuggly tucked into your defensive position and safe from the blast and splinters, it is pretty dangerous to attackers who may be out in the open, hence it is the defensive grenade. The offensive one is just tin, if you toss it into a position it hurts the baddies... but out in the open it is not so dangerous...

They are a model from the 1950s that we were still being issued in the early 1990s... they still made a damned good bang.

In the Gulf they started experiments with issuing 3 other kinds of grenades on top of these, "aveuglement", "assourdisment" and I cannot remember the third type. A ridiculous choice if you have to keep track of which one of 5 kinds of grenades you had where and which one would you use best in the following situation. I think the 3 other kinds were probably made for police units and they just wanted to test them. I am not aware of any having being used.

Offensive and defensive were enough choice.

Best

Chris

[Shagpile]

I have been reading the ongoing discussion about reversed bullets with some interest, and as I am supposed to know something about the subject, I wondered if my comments might shed some objective light on things.

Firstly, the cartridge found on the Boer War battlefield is a commercial .303 inch Lee Metford hunting one, introduced in 1889 with a 210 or 192 grain expanding bullet, illegal in warfare, but preferred for use on game animals. How it got there is supposition of course, but officers could and did carry their own rifles and many would have had hunting ammunition for those weapons. So too, of course did the Boers. Until 1909 all British military ammunition was .303 inch Mk VI round nosed [similar in general type to the cartridge found in South Africa] with a 215 grain cupro-nickel bullet. In 1910 the first Mk VII cartridge was adopted with a 174 grain c/n pointed bullet and this was standard through the Great War.

Secondly, between 1900 and 1905 the Germans had experimented a great deal with new forms of ammunition, particularly the radical French 'Balle D' bullet of 1898, and a patent was granted to Artur Gleinich of Konigs-Wusterhausen/DWM in 1905 for the German equivalent 'spitzer' or pointed nosed, 'S Munition' cartridge, which became the standard for all German military ammunition during the war. The Germans did not issue any form of armour piercing ammunition until at least the very end of 1914, and this was the Spitzgeschoss mit Stahlkern round or 's.m.K'. With a tungsten alloy core, it was very effective indeed but was initially available only in very limited quantities. A document dated March 28 1915 gives instructions for its use by snipers, so it was clearly in more general use by then but was not widely available to line infantry until 1917.

Prior to the issue of S.m.K ammunition, there is no question that reversed and tampered [or Dum Dum] bullets were use by both sides, Pte Frank Richards writes of his comrades snipping off the tops of their bullets in Bois Grenier '...one of our who I knew very well never went sniping unless he had cut the tips of his bullets off.' The Germans must have done likewise, in the false belief that it made a mortal wound more likely. But who first realised that a reversed bullet had additional penetrative power over standard ammunition is a moot point. On balance, it was most likely the French, who experimented a great deal with their new Balle D ammunition on condemned prisoners and live animals.

From my own experiments with both Dum-Dum and reversed bullets whilst working at the Royal Armouries I can confirm that a reversed bullet WILL penetrate a steel plate that a normal bullet will not, but the limitation is one of range. As already described by another contributor, bullet reversal will make it highly unstable in flight, limiting both range and accuracy, however, at trench sniping distances, often well under 100 yards, this is of no consequence of course. Part of the reason they are more effective is that inserting the bullet nose first into the cartridge compacts the powder charge and greatly raised chamber pressures and thus velocity. [it also renders it more likely that the rifle could rupture its breech.] Many of these bullets would have been used not by snipers, who relied on their skill and accuracy, but by ordinary infantrymen, who were otherwise incapable of the level of shooting required to put a bullet through the tiny steel loophole-plate aperture. Knocking a hole through a loophole plate was the next best thing.

Lastly I attach a picture of a reversed German S cartridge, found in a field near where I live here on the Somme. The lad who found it was greatly puzzled and brought it to me for identification. It was cut open to ensure it was indeed an original S bullet, and that the case was filled with powder. I've examined the cartridge under a microscope and it shows all of the age-related corrosion that I would expect and it was still filled with heavily compacted nitro-cellulose based powder. The base markings show it to be a Deutsche Munitionsfabriken round made in November 1916 with the standard S67 code for a cupro-nickel, pointed bullet. The how and why it was in a field near Serre I'm afraid I'll never know.

If anybody requires more detailed pictures of this or comparable cartridges, please contact me.

Martin Pegler

[Ex curator of firearms, Royal Armouries, author of Out of Nowhere, a History of Military Sniping, and Sniping in the Great War.]

[Gunner Bailey]

Martin

Welcome to the forum. I'm sure we will need to consult you on many related subjects.

Gunner Bailey

[gew98]

I have been reading the ongoing discussion about reversed bullets with some interest, and as I am supposed to know something about the subject, I wondered if my comments might shed some objective light on things.

Firstly, the cartridge found on the Boer War battlefield is a commercial .303 inch Lee Metford hunting one, introduced in 1889 with a 210 or 192 grain expanding bullet, illegal in warfare, but preferred for use on game animals. How it got there is supposition of course, but officers could and did carry their own rifles and many would have had hunting ammunition for those weapons. So too, of course did the Boers. Until 1909 all British military ammunition was .303 inch Mk VI round nosed [similar in general type to the cartridge found in South Africa] with a 215 grain cupro-nickel bullet. In 1910 the first Mk VII cartridge was adopted with a 174 grain c/n pointed bullet and this was standard through the Great War.

Secondly, between 1900 and 1905 the Germans had experimented a great deal with new forms of ammunition, particularly the radical French 'Balle D' bullet of 1898, and a patent was granted to Artur Gleinich of Konigs-Wusterhausen/DWM in 1905 for the German equivalent 'spitzer' or pointed nosed, 'S Munition' cartridge, which became the standard for all German military ammunition during the war. The Germans did not issue any form of armour piercing ammunition until at least the very end of 1914, and this was the Spitzgeschoss mit Stahlkern round or 's.m.K'. With a tungsten alloy core, it was very effective indeed but was initially available only in very limited quantities. A document dated March 28 1915 gives instructions for its use by snipers, so it was clearly in more general use by then but was not widely available to line infantry until 1917.

Prior to the issue of S.m.K ammunition, there is no question that reversed and tampered [or Dum Dum] bullets were use by both sides, Pte Frank Richards writes of his comrades snipping off the tops of their bullets in Bois Grenier '...one of our who I knew very well never went sniping unless he had cut the tips of his bullets off.' The Germans must have done likewise, in the false belief that it made a mortal wound more likely. But who first realised that a reversed bullet had additional penetrative power over standard ammunition is a moot point. On balance, it was most likely the French, who experimented a great deal with their new Balle D ammunition on condemned prisoners and live animals.

From my own experiments with both Dum-Dum and reversed bullets whilst working at the Royal Armouries I can confirm that a reversed bullet WILL penetrate a steel plate that a normal bullet will not, but the limitation is one of range. As already described by another contributor, bullet reversal will make it highly unstable in flight, limiting both range and accuracy, however, at trench sniping distances, often well under 100 yards, this is of no consequence of course. Part of the reason they are more effective is that inserting the bullet nose first into the cartridge compacts the powder charge and greatly raised chamber pressures and thus velocity. [it also renders it more likely that the rifle could rupture its breech.] Many of these bullets would have been used not by snipers, who relied on their skill and accuracy, but by ordinary infantrymen, who were otherwise incapable of the level of shooting required to put a bullet through the tiny steel loophole-plate aperture. Knocking a hole through a loophole plate was the next best thing.

Lastly I attach a picture of a reversed German S cartridge, found in a field near where I live here on the Somme. The lad who found it was greatly puzzled and brought it to me for identification. It was cut open to ensure it was indeed an original S bullet, and that the case was filled with powder. I've examined the cartridge under a microscope and it shows all of the age-related corrosion that I would expect and it was still filled with heavily compacted nitro-cellulose based powder. The base markings show it to be a Deutsche Munitionsfabriken round made in November 1916 with the standard S67 code for a cupro-nickel, pointed bullet. The how and why it was in a field near Serre I'm afraid I'll never know.

If anybody requires more detailed pictures of this or comparable cartridges, please contact me.

Martin Pegler

[Ex curator of firearms, Royal Armouries, author of Out of Nowhere, a History of Military Sniping, and Sniping in the Great War.]

Martin , well done. The only detail I's argue you on is the adoption date of the S patrone. Which was in 1903 - early 1903 for sure. Not being clearly documneted in regards to the actual bullet change , but very clearly documented in the gew98 rifle as ALL new production gew98 from 1903 and after had the S patrone calibrated rear sight assembly. The only exception to this is Amberg as 1903 was their first year of gew98 production and of the two 1903 dated amberg gew98's I have handled had the original 88 patrone rear sight base , but were upgraded at a later time with the S patrone Lange visier sight leaf and slide.

The germans as well never fully stopped 88 patronen manufacture. It was continued in use oddly enough with MG08's for long range fire applications until the germans in very late 1917 experimented with near identical profile copies of the Balle D bullet for long range MG use. After the war within 3 years the germans adopted the sS patrone ( schweres Spitzgeschoss ) as standard for MG's rifles and carbines.

The sectioned turned turtle bullet you pictured is in very excellent condition - excepting for the base of the steel bullet jacket rusted away a bit.

[centurion]

In fact the S.m.K ammunition was issued to ordinary infantry as early as 1916. Otto Scholz a captain in a Westphalian infantry regiment recalled of Sept 1916 "We had heard rumours about a new Allied weapon and our intelligence had sent us notes about the new vehicle which they believed was being built in certain French factories. The rumours said it was a sort of armoured car and we had been given supplies of armour piercing bullets of the type usually used for shooting at snipers loopholes in pillboxes" (Scholz's company was to have an opportunity to use it at Flers)

[gew98]

In fact the S.m.K ammunition was issued to ordinary infantry as early as 1916. Otto Scholz a captain in a Westphalian infantry regiment recalled of Sept 1916 "We had heard rumours about a new Allied weapon and our intelligence had sent us notes about the new vehicle which they believed was being built in certain French factories. The rumours said it was a sort of armoured car and we had been given supplies of armour piercing bullets of the type usually used for shooting at snipers loopholes in pillboxes" (Scholz's company was to have an opportunity to use it at Flers)

Not sure why you posted this..it's known when and why S.m.K cartridges were supplied in chargers and in belts.

[59165]

Not sure why you posted this..it's known when and why S.m.K cartridges were supplied in chargers and in belts.

Well,I'm sorry.kid.

It wasn't known to me so that post did inform me of something I didn't know.

Dave.Not an anorak.

[4thGordons]

QUOTE (centurion @ Nov 27 2008, 12:33 PM)

In fact the S.m.K ammunition was issued to ordinary infantry as early as 1916. Otto Scholz a captain in a Westphalian infantry regiment recalled of Sept 1916 "We had heard rumours about a new Allied weapon and our intelligence had sent us notes about the new vehicle which they believed was being built in certain French factories. The rumours said it was a sort of armoured car and we had been given supplies of armour piercing bullets of the type usually used for shooting at snipers loopholes in pillboxes" (Scholz's company was to have an opportunity to use it at Flers)

Not sure why you posted this..it's known when and why S.m.K cartridges were supplied in chargers and in belts.

I think Centurion's post was in response to M.Pegler's comment: "but was initially available only in very limited quantities. A document dated March 28 1915 gives instructions for its use by snipers, so it was clearly in more general use by then but was not widely available to line infantry until 1917."

Chris

(bit of an anorak but learning a lot from this thread!)

[centurion]

Thanks Chris that's exactly why I posted it

[TonyE]

Sorry,Robert.

I've just seen your post.

In 'naff',I meant that over even only 200 meters,the ball was entering the target at between 2 & 4" off bullseye compared to normal rounds.Penetrating power cant be properly gaged because of the age of the bullets used.The nickel/lead 303's are slightly decayed & will splinter when fired normally.

Whenever I shoot my .303's,I use period(1916/17)bullets interchanged with 1960's/70's cases(as the primers rarely work on the old uns).I have an inertia hammer for bullet removal,I keep the cordite & replace the modern powder with this so I basically have an original 303fired from an '18 dated SMLE.

With the reversed,I had to reload the new powder as with the cordite charge,there wasn't room for the bullet to reseat itself enough for easy loading.Hope you can follow that?Its not very well explained,easier when you see it.

Penetrating power was a bit less,for obvious aerodynamical reasons but the Germans wouldn't have had some of the loading problems I had as they used powder.

I will endeavour to go kill a sand bag as I think that would prove to be the best use of these reversed jobbies after reading all these posts.

Dave.

I know this is going back a few posts, but I would be interested to know how you reload a case with the the full charge of cordite, as the original round was loaded before the case was necked.

Why go to all that touble. A Mark VII round made in the 1950s is just the same as one made in WWI, except the envelope would be gilding metal not cupro nickel. If you want to replicate the penetration of a WWI round you only need to load with a modern powder to the normal MV of 2450 fps.

Regards

TonyE

[MikB]

I know this is going back a few posts, but I would be interested to know how you reload a case with the the full charge of cordite, as the original round was loaded before the case was necked.

Why go to all that touble. A Mark VII round made in the 1950s is just the same as one made in WWI, except the envelope would be gilding metal not cupro nickel. If you want to replicate the penetration of a WWI round you only need to load with a modern powder to the normal MV of 2450 fps.

Regards

TonyE

Tony, he did explain that that was pretty much what he did where he'd had to remove the cordite charge, as when reversing the bullet.

My own experience is that it's difficult if not impossible to get the bullet out of a Mk.VII with an inertial hammer without seriously disturbing the cordite. I found that several sticks were driven through the pasteboard wad and one or two might follow the bullet out of the case - putting them back would be problematic.

Regards,

MikB