B Grade Mannlicher 1888/90 from RTI - Rusty Trash or Hidden Treasure? 

Yea, it's always disappointing, but I feel like I'm addicted at this low price now. I have a Gras coming, lol

I will try!

Do you ever pay the hand select fee? My first RTI order was a 1981 Carcano. After watching you and 8mm Mauser Man’s vids I chose hand select, and I’m very happy! Haven’t fired yet, but cleaned all the cosmoline, oiled up and she looks nice. All parts, including cleaning rod, and maybe 40-50% bluing. Not too many wire wheel marks. I’m waiting for a 1981 Carcano carbine, chose hand select, so we’ll see..

Yea, I've watched some other 88/90 videos and images from collectors and mine is definitely on the worse side compared to others I have seen.

​@@GearyGunderson I was just back on the RTI website and the URL for these guns ends in "__trashed-3/" Every other gun, the URL is the name of the gun

I still need to get a hold of some ammo for it. I purchased one of the Vetterli's as well, and yea, not sure about shooting that one.

@@GearyGunderson I got one of the RTI 6.5 vetterlis a couple years ago (at the $350 price), but since got a couple others from various auction sites at much less than that and mostly in better condition (though one was covered in heavy varnish with the bolt stuck from it, probably a display item ... but was in good shape mechanically and a good bore.) The RTI one I got was weird, though, the firing pin was WAY oversized, like nearly the diameter of the primer pocket big and with the torque on the bolt that the vetterli style firing pin spring and striker have, it MIGHT actually put camming force on the bolt and cause it to unlock (or partially open) under firing. It makes me wonder if one of C&rsenal's vetterli unlocked for similar reasons. None of the others I've got had such large diameter firing pins, so that's odd. (the original 10.4 mm pin may be that large and it wasn't properly machined down for 6.5 mm ... it might also depend on which style of bolt re-facing was done: soldered/brazed vs re-cut) Plus C&rsenal used Hornady ammo, which is pretty close to maxed out for the Carcano action and hotter than the original military ammo, plus uses oversized .268" diameter bullets, increasing pressures further. The original bullets were closer to .266 and also slightly tapered, so only the base was that wide. Plus they were flat base FMJ and will deform under pressure so the base expands to oversized bore diameters (some versions might have been hollow base as well, but FMJ flat base expands under pressure too, several 1890s era military rifle loads did this and several WWI era ones as well, including the spitzer bullets for 7.62x54R, different from the later steel core FMJ BT loads). Hornady's 160 gr flat base .268" bullets seem to be fairly hard and also more cylindrical with a large section over .264" which is not what you want and also doesn't work well in carcanos with worn out rifling. (cast bullets with .264" bore riding sections and oversized .267~.269" shanks/skirts tend to work and FMJ flat base .264" bullets SHOULD work if you can get them, as should old milsurp ammo and/or pulled bullets). The hornady softpoints probably end up being too hard to deform into shallow rifling and end up slipping the rifling on worn bores where a more tapered round with oversized base or an undersized one with expanding base should work. (oversized cast bullets tend to work) The problem is that no modern ammo is offered as FMJ flat base and BT bullets won't expand while flat-base softpoint (like hornady uses) also won't expand. The only 6.5 mm FMJ flat base offering I'm aware of is the fairly expensive 100 grain round nose Lapua match grade ammo, but you could try handloading for that or going with cast bullets. (there's plenty of vetterli-safe hand loading options out there) I've also seen multiple accounts (though not specifically with RTI guns) of PPU 6.5 carcano ammo working just fine in vetterlis as far as function goes at least. That ammo looks on the warm end by specs, but it does use lighter boat-tailed and undersized (.263 or .264") bullets that will likely have some gas leakage around them and at very least not jam tight in the bore like the Hornady bullets. Accuracy should be poorer with those as well, but they do seem to be more compatible with the vetterlis out there going by the anecdotal evidence. (handloading would obviously be preferable and the price of 6.5 carcano ammo is further incentive for that, though brass is also a bit scarce and pricy) Steinel's 160 gr cast lead load with modest muzzel velocity rating (1770 fps from 30" barrel) seems like it would be easier on weaker rifles, though muzzle velocity alone isn't a good indicator of pressure. (though it is for recoil impulse/force, which is also worth noting: ie actual sustained force put on the bolt face vs peak pressure which would relate to maximum instantaneous force put on the bolt face as well as the chamber: reduced loads using fast powders may have high pressured but low recoil impulse; though full power loads can produce the same pressure AND higher recoil impulse and that peak pressure or near peak pressure will extend over a longer period) It's also worth taking a chamber casting to see if the chamber is in spec of oversized or even possibly undersized (causing higher pressures). Using fire-formed cases would also be better as capacity should be increased and pressures lower, plus gas seal should be better. Also, totally aside from "blowing up" a vetterli (or more likely cracking lugs), there's the issue of shooting the barrel lining loose. This seems to mostly happen when the barrel overheats from rapid fire in hot conditions, leading to enough expansion to separate the friction/compression fit barrel liner. (though if you happen upon one with an already damaged muzzle/crown, it MIGHT be feasible to weld the seam there to help prevent this, with the muzzle plugged with cotton or paper to avoid weld spatter) The barrel liners also seem to be relatively soft and prone to wear from improper cleaning (mostly an issue at the muzzle crown) so avoid steel cleaning rods if you can, even contact with soft, annealed mild steel seems to be an issue. (given the barrel lining method, it would make sense they were never heat treated and were fairly soft when originally installed as: they needed to be soft enough to be pressed/swaged tight into the old barrel, they needed to be soft enough to have rifling cut after that, and heat-treating after assembly could case separation of the liner) Wood, brass, and aluminum cleaning rods (and clearing rods) along with pullthroughs would be best. Though if something REALLY gets stuck in there, a mild steel rod that very nearly matches the bore diameter might work OK, so it's fully supported by the rifling but won't get stuck itself, though brass or aluminum would be better. (1/4" round rod that actually measures .250" should work ... I've gotten burned with aluminum round rod at .260" which is too big, and it seems to be easier to find .250" steel rods than Al or Brass.) An undersized rod would be significantly worse as it'd be prone to smacking into the bore under impact, plus asymmetrical wear on the crown, plus depending on the nature of the obstruction, the undersized end of the rod might just cause the thing to expand and get stuck worse under pressure. (I ran into that problem with a stuck cleaning wad when working on a rusty bore ... that was a mess that would've been easy to solve with a .250" round rod on hand)

The bore actually isn't too bad on this one. The rifling is actually stronger than the M95 I picked up before this. It's not a total loss or anything, but a lesser B grade than some others I have seen online.

From what I know, getting a better condition overall rifle is what will be the mostly used/worn out bore while the damaged or missing parts rifle will be in storage and not fired a lot.@@GearyGunderson

Yea, I kind of think they pulled mine out of the C Grade lot since they shipped it right when those started showing up.

It was originally compressed black powder in 1888, by '90 semi smokeless.

Yea, it's definitely disappointing.