Competition participation round?

I have an odd ball that I’m trying to figure out. I’m sure it is a participation round given out at shooting competitions but I’m not sure. I’m also not sure the cartridge but the picture attached it’s the one in the right, next to a standard .308 round.

The casing is polished and has two ribs laterally placed in the middle and the entire bullet is green in color.

The head stamp is: 6 027 9. I’m guessing shooter 027 in the year 1969, any help would be appreciated as I can’t find on the net, or I just don’t know where to look.

Thanks everyone! V/r Henry

I can not see an image but what you are describing is a Swedish made dummy, a regular variant for their armed forces.

The two “ribs” you are mentioning are actually grooves or flutes.

Is it the lower one?
https://www.amkat.se/index.php?Env=Ammo&Menu_A=30&Menu_B=70&Menu_C=40&Menu_Value_A=7,62x51&Menu_Value_B=Inert&Menu_Name=Inert

While there is no picture on this thread, for whatever reason, you have described a standard Swedish dummy cartridge (also called drill cartridge, exercise cartridge, etc.). The factory designator code on this military dummy round has nothing at all to do with a shooter number, but is represents manufacture by Norma Projektilfabrik, of Amotfors, Sweden.

Without the picture, the caliber, or case type, is just a guess, but I would think with a 1969 date it is likely 6.5 x 55 mm, as a large quantity of those cartridges, along with other types, was imported into the US after Sweden sold a large number of their Models 96 and 38 Rifles, in that caliber, in the USA. All of the dummies I have seen from that importation were of the 1969 date, with nickel-plated (or perhaps chrome, as there is no yellowish sheen to them), two case cannelures, and green-color spitzer bullets.

The same basic dummy was made in other Swedish calibers, like 9 mm Browning Long, 9 mm Parabellum, and 7.62 x 51 mm (7.62 NATO, .308 Winchester) and perhaps others.

Below is a picture of the box label for the dummy rounds, designated as “6,5 mm laddblindpatron m/41” in Sweden, along with a full clip of these rounds, and a box label for 40 of the stripper clips, designated as “6,5 mm laddram.”

John Moss

Wow, you guys are great! Sorry, I did in fact forget the picture but you guys nailed it, thanks a lot!

I have recently come back to the states after almost 30 years and am now catching up with a cartridge collection I inherited so I need to come here once in a while when I hit a brick wall.

Again, thanks, and here’s the picture!

“HF” - I guessed correctly. Your nice Swedish drill round is caliber 6.5 x 55 mm Mauser. There is a very nice assortment in this caliber for the collector. I do not collect it myself, but my love for the cartridge as a shooter and owner of several versions of Swedish Mauser rifles and carbine, have left me retaining a few samples of various types. It is a great cartridge for both the collector and the shooter.

John Moss

John, thank you! I am also both shooter and now a collector. I always enjoyed going with my dad to trade shows and watching him discuss all the different cartridges. Now they’re mine to figure them all out. Thanks again for your input and I’ll be looking out for more of these in this caliber in the collection.

V/r Henry Hubbard

John;
Hate to “correct” you but I just want to point out that the 6,5x55 doesn’t need the suffix “Mauser”, “Swede Mauser”, etc.
It was a two-country joint development initially for the Norwegian Krag-Jørgensen rifles and carbines, and Mauser-derived Swedish rifles and carbines. Mauser weren’t involved in the cartridge design.

Ole

Tennsats - I was aware of that Ole, but we were handling a question by a relatively new cartridge collector, but a shooter as well, and in the United States, among shooters, the common name of that caliber in conversations is 6.5 Swede or 6.5 Swedish Mauser. This may be a product of the fact that Norwegian Krags in 6.5 x 55 mm have always been scarce in the USA, while the Mauser-type Swedish Model 96, Model 96/38 and Model 38 have been quite common in the USA, having been imported in very large numbers, and sold at prices well under US100.00, although I assume now that they are not available on the market in such huge numbers anymore. The Swedish rifles have a big following in the US, probably bought because of the cheap price and obvious quality, and followed by the discovery that they are great rifles to shoot - highly accurate and with very moderate recoil. I can’t speak from a hunting perspective, because I am not a hunter, not ever have been, although I support legal hunting as among the best “game management” tools.

Having worked in a gunshop for 36 years, I got used to using the “common language.” I have never been a very scientific chap, but while aware of a lot of firearms and ammunition technicalities, sometimes when you are selling product, and I don’t mean as a high-pressure salesman or one of misleads his customers, it is best to speaking in common terminology used among casual shooters, and hunters. The real “firearms/ammo Techs” are in the minority, when viewed from a total perspective of gun owners. For me, hard to break old habits, and sometimes done purposefully with a new collector, to keep things clear.

Of course, your comments are quite correct, and especially needed here was the reminder that the cartridge itself was NOT a Waffenfabrik Mauser A.-G development.

Thank you.

John

John,
I respectfully disagree and fully support Ole’s position.
Particularly when dealing with new, inexperienced collectors, we should in my view not encourage them to learn wrong “facts” because these are common language. On the contrary, as early as possible we should try to convey that a lot of things generally talked about by a lot of people are often disturbingly wrong. Science (and the overall level of this forum could well be called science in my opinion) is advanced by doubt, not by uncritical belief.
I do not share the view that “Techs” should shut up because we are in a minority. On the contrary.
Please do not take this admittedly harsh criticism as directed against you personally. I think it is really important for us all, trying to get on with expanding our knowledge, that people, like Ole in this example, who see a wrong fact perpetuated, step in and point out reality. Coming from a people that invented “gesundes Volksempfinden” that is important to me.

Some weeks ago, I delivered a sports shooter his permit for a 6,5 x 55 Kragrifle. It was made in 1906 and in absolute mint condition, I even think never used before. He was more than enthusiastic, almost euphoric about the qualities of the rifle and its ammunition.

John, I think you might be missing my point (which was very well summed up above). New/returning collectors, shooters, hunters, and so on should not be “fed” with wrong terms simply because they’re more popular or common (or easier).

As an example, here in Norway, when it comes to firearm related vocabulary, we have many “correct” terms and many more “popular” terms. The first ones being often used by people who served in the military or are around guns in a professional setting, or collect seriously. Casual shooters/collectors, people who hunt and don’t care about the firearm at all etc use the popular and informal ones.

One very common mistake is referring to the whole barrel of a firearm as the “bore” when they reality mean to say “barrel”. Løp = bore, pipe = barrel. Military and police documents, manuals, instructions, legislative papers, etc clearly use the “pipe” term. Yet companies keep talking about the “løp” and spreading this stupid mistake!
Same goes for people using words translated directly from English, the correct Norwegian word for the device on a handgun which halts the slide on an empty magazine is called “varsler” or “alerter”, as in it alerts the user of the magazine being empty. However, many (most) people use the ridiculous term “sleidestopp” (“slide stop”) when this has NO historical basis, and has never been used in any military or police paper, being only a direct, poor translation.

The same goes for the well known 8x57 IS/IRS-JS/JRS debacle. Manufacturers like Norma sadly keep using entirely incorrect terms, just because people are used to it…

As for the 6,5 x 55 cartridge, seeing as it was used in the KJ rifles/carbines, Swedish rifles and carbines, AG-42, Madsen, various Colt LMGs and MMGs, and even the Ksp 58 (FN MAG (M240)), it’s in my eyes plain wrong to connect the cartridge simply to the Swedish rifles. Again, it was a joint development (with the design originating in Norwegian ongoing bullet diameter trials), and thus it’s wrong to give all the credit to the Swedes (or even to Mauser like many people do). A bit like how the Gewehr 1888 is VERY often called the “Mauser 1888”.
There are later civilian “redesigns” or “new standardizations” of the original cartridge but in my eyes just “6,5 x 55” is more than enough to know what one is talking about.
Only for modern use with tight chamber tolerances is it necessary to talk about “SKAN” and “SE” chambers.

And like pointed out, don’t take this personally (I trust you know me well enough not to!), it is my general view and how I treat all of these “wrong” terms :-)

Ole

Peelen and Ole,

I respect, very much, your positions on this. You are correct. It is best to use correct terminology. It is hard to think every minute about every word said, though, when you are used to using “common language” used within your country at a level somewhat different than a scholarly study of ammunition. I will try to be more precise in the future.

Regarding the linkage to specific weapons, I am aware of the other weapons that used the 6.5 x 55, and in fact, have manuals on some of them. I chose to mention those using this cartridge that were the most commonly known to American shooters and collectors. The list above is still incomplete, as left out of the equation were many, many sporting rifles chambered for the 6.5 x 55 mm. There, I can make no apologies for not attempting to list them all. That is the kind of information done in full, multi-page articles and even books on specific case types. Could we list, for example, every single rifle and machine gun and in some cases, pistols, in a casual response to a inquiry, every firearm for which cartridges like the .30-Model of 1906, the 7.9 x 57 mm, the .303, the 9 mm Parabellum, etc., were made, in a short forum answer?

Again, though, in the main, I agree with your answers.

John

All, again, thank you very much for your valuable inputs. I see that I have joined the right organization and have come to the right place in order to learn the trade.

I am ex-military and am more in tune to military items Including surplus, shooting, and limited knowledge on military cartridges but my father was much more rounded and has so many beautiful cartridges yet to be identified (by me).

I value everyone’s input as it contributes to my knowledge so once more, thanks, and I’m sure I’ll be back soon with another one I can’t figure out!

V/r Henry Hubbard