My lucky day


I had a pretty bad day, until I walked into a local gun shop and saw this. The shop experts identified this as a “303 British clip” and it was mine for $3. I really wanted that “clip”. Now I am happy.
Oh, the rounds are Barnaul 1955.
Is the charger really early 1900’s Луганск? I am always leery of fakes.


Hard to tell … but if “patina” is a measure of reality then my own scabby example is probably a good 'un.



Peter, check dundas56 if you haven’t done so.


John, what is “dundas56”?


I think ya dun well


Should have included this document, because of Peters interest in clips. Just wanted to make sure he saw it.

For 30 years I was trying to locate a publication called the "Munitions Digest’, without any success. Even John Martin, with all his contacts couldn’t couldn’t find any reference to it. Appears to have been so secret it was sealed for many years.
The figures can be confusing, so need to be carefully used to avoid spreading erroneous information.



God some gunshop employees have no idea.

It’s both hilarious and really concerning and sad at the same time.



Unless I’m mistaken you have the wrong idea of John Martin.

The guy I knew, who was referred to me by Footscray factory after he retired, worked there from around 1917 to 1964. He had personal knowledge, access to their records, and those of the Army Inspection Service, and was able to search the records to answer some of my questions.

The Munitions Digest was a top secret document produced during WW2 for the Government, detailing production and deliveries of SAA and all types of munitions. I knew of the document, but couldn’t find any record of it until it was released from the secrecy shroud. Even John Martin with all his contacts couldn’t locate it.

My regret is the short time we were able to exchange questions and answers. I still have dozens of questions he could have answered.



I believe Guin was referring to the gun shop where sksvlad purchased this 7.62x54R M.N. Russian clip & the shop told him they were .303", nothing to do with the gentleman you were posting about.

And I don’t think either sksvlad or I understand your post to Peter “check dundas56 if you haven’t done so.”


Thanks Pete,

My abject apologies for the error.


dundas56 is;


Thanks Joe I’d never have guessed.