.303 clip identification


#1

I was at a gunshow yesterday and was shown this .303 stripper clip and asked if I had ever seen this design. I hadn’t (no surprise) but it looked different enough to me that I took these pictures to post them here.

The clip is loaded with Canadian Mk 5’s.



Thanks,
Paul


#2

IMHO it is a MkII charger which missed haveing the slots cut in the bottom.


#3

Yes, a Mark II, (Slots either missed or an actual production variant?))…and the cartridges are either Mark II or Mark VI…the Mark V was a “Dum-Dum” ( or Hollow Point) cartridge, of the line of "Mark II Dum-Dum Special, Mark III ( open point) Mark IV ( punched Hollow Point and Mark V "( Formed Hollow Point). All these ( “expanding Bullet” )cartridges were banned by the Hague Convention of 1899, and prohibited for use against organised Troops ( of European origin or style)…ie, it was fine to use them against rampaging Natives and Rebels in colonial countries, but not against White men or those assimilated to White Europeans.
The Large quantities already made of these cartridges were relegated to Training Use only ( as the Boer War had just started)…but they were still used in the “Mad Mullah” insurrection in Somaliland in 1902-06 period by the British Forces there. ( The “Mad Mullah” was a spiritual heir to the Mahdi of Khartoum, Gen. Gordon’s nemesis).

Regards,
Doc AV


#4

Its a strange one and I’ve never seen its like.

The slots in the base would normally have been cut out at the same time as the holes in the sides which leads me to think it is more than just a missed production stage. That the end spring hasn’t been slit at the narrowest part, which I think was the final stage of forming the charger (as opposed to finishing) leads me to think this was done on purpose.

Very interesting and I wouldn’t mind getting my acquisitive little mitts on it.

Happy collecting, Peter

edited; early morning foolishness of mind


#5

[quote=“enfield56”]Its a strange one and I’ve never seen its like.

The slots in the base would normally have been cut out at the same time as the holes in the sides which leads me to think it is more than just a missed production stage. That the end spring hasn’t been slit at the narrowest part, which I think was the final stage of forming the charger (as opposed to finishing) leads me to think this was done on purpose.

Very interesting and I wouldn’t mind getting my acquisitive little mitts on it.

Happy collecting, Peter

edited; early morning foolishness of mind[/quote]

I agree with Peter, this sort of omission (the four slits in the base) could not be missed by accident. It may be a trial of a production simplification, I would think that the four narrow slits were difficult to punch. Later designs (Mark III and IV) switched to simpler circular holes. One further oddity about this charger, besides the lack of a cutout for the end spring tabs is the lack of the pressed retaining lugs for the end cartridges on those springs. Too many differences to be unintentional. Possibly an attempt to overcome the deficiencies of the Mark I charger but with a simpler design than the standard Mark II. This charger has the additional “third lug” on the side in common with the Mark I and the earlier Mark II’s, it was deleted in the later Mark II’s and all subsequent marks.

A nice item which my collection now needs!

gravelbelly


#6

Thank you, Gents.

Alas it is not mine to offer. However, I will see it’s owner at the end of the month and can make offers if requested.

Contact me via PM.

Paul