Replica and orginale Mars and B.S.A


#1

Can anyone PLEASE post a good picture of the replica and original Mars and B.S.A. auto pistol rounds and the hds too?.
If you don’t want to share it, please send it to me direct, I will not share it later, if you say so.
Thanks


#2

You always writte BTT !
What does it mean ?
JP


#3

Jean-Pierre - BTT means “Back to the Top.” The administrators use it as a quick way to move an unanswered question back to the top of the Forum in the hope someone can answer it the second time around.


#4

O.K. Looks like no one else is going to give any answer to this. My effort will be poor. The only MARS replica I have is an unfinished case for the nonexistant (?) 10mm MARS cartridge. I have pictured it along with the four original MARS rounds I have, which are the two common versions of the 9mm, the .45 Short Case and the .45 Long case. In the same picture is a replica 39 BSA cartridge. I do not have an original, or would not have spent the rather large amount for a “toy” cartridge to put it in my collection.

The cartridge pictures, which will be posted later for me by Joe, is pretty good. The headstamp picture is wretched, and I simply don’t have time to try it again. Between my nornmal, heavy shaking of the hands and trying to mark the rounds to orient them on the scanner plate, I have little or no success. I did not want to use my system of inserting them thru holes in card stock because of a real press for time. Also, when I put paper on them it seems to move the cartridges somewhat. I can see now why people prefer digital cameras. The scanner does a potentially good job but the problem of setting round, heavy cartridges on glass is frustrating. I do not have any perfectly flat place to level the scanner so even cartridges won’t roll, and my scanner, due to the size of the desk and where I have to have it, is behind the screen and very hard to work at, over the top of the screen.

I am sorry for this poor effort, which probably doesn’t give the answers the inquirer wanted (I am not sure what they are), but it is the best I can do.


#5

You always writte BTT !
What does it mean ?
JP[/quote]

@ Jean-Pierre -

Mr. Moss answered your question with his usual pinpoint accuracy.

However, if I or someone else should use such an acronym in the future, you can consult the list of Internet acronyms I posted in the Tech forum. It’s not definitive, but I’m reasonably sure it covers 99% of those in use, even the most obscure. These developed over time, largely in IRC chat rooms, back when connections were far slower and often when people were paying long distance toll rates for the time on line. I try not to use many in this setting, but some - such as “BTT” - are fairly common and I’m afraid they have been habit forming for me.

@ John Moss -

Sent you an eMail with suggestions how to improve your luck with the scanner images with no extra effort on your part. Thanks for all the great replies you give us!

.


#6

Heh…“BTT” was actually a new one on me, too! “Bump” is the word I’ve seen most often used.

Ya learn somethin’ new every day…


#7

Thanks for the kind words. I try my best, but sometimes engage my typing fingers (now replacing mouth) before I engage my brain. On the recent thread about unheadstamped British Incendiary rounds, I jumped in and agreed it looked Japanese based solely on the powder. Now I find looking at my old catalog that when I had my Ca. State License, and collected .303 (now long gone), I had this round and correctly identified it as British. I went by the only thing I had never looked at, the powder pictured, which looked Japanese to me because I didn’t know the Brits used that type. Hmmm - a little knowledge…!

Thanks for the photo tips. I just have to get a digital camera one of these days, though. Just wonder if an OF with a 19th Century brain can learn to use one.

Joe will post my mixed-quality photos for my initial response on this thread when he gets the chance, Lord love him!

John Moss


#8

Here are pictures of the Mars .45 Short and Long from my collection. Perhaps it will be intersting to compare them to John’s when his get posted.


#9

Guy - your pictures are better! Beautiful. Thanks.

John M.


#10

John Moss Collection


#11

John,
Unfortunately, I don’t have more than the two to take pictures of. You must have quite a collection. Also, your scans are fine; I don’t know why you think they are not.


#12

Guy - I don’t like the headstamps all out of line - the one cartridge moved almost off the picture - and all the disturbing background. I do better when I push the cartridges thru holes in white card stock. If the holes are tight, I can turn the cartridges ahead of time so that the headstamps are all oriented the same, and they don’t move, but I didn’t have time. The cartridges are o.k. but they wouldn’t stay straight up on the plastic square piece I used to try to keep them straight. When I put a piece of paper over them to cut out bad background, it moved a couple of them a little tilted. I guess I should consider them just information and be satisfied, but its not in my nature.

My collection is o.k. I don’t have a lot of the really rare case types, but I have my share I guess, considering that when they were not quite so ridiculous in price as today, although I still couldn’t afford them many of them, having chosen a career in my hobby instead of one with good pay. As the years went on, and I could start to afford a few of them, you couldn’t find them any more. Now, with some of them, you have to be Bill Gates to afford them if you even can find them. I am happy with what i have, though. My main interest is really headstamps, so the early, unheadstamped, rare case types are not that big a deal to me. I enjoy seeing them as much in other people’s collection as my own, and once I have seen them, and learned about them, they lose some interest for me. I don’t look at my own often. I like the calibers that are always growing with new headstamps, like 9mm Para, etc. I know some consider them mundane, but they are the really important calibers being used world wide, not things like the MARS cartridges that were even a commercial failure, and saw no military use at all. Doesn’t mean I don’t like them - sure I like having the ones I do, but from my perspective, they aren’t that important unless they truly were a new development in ammunition, and not many of the early auto pistol rounds really were anything particularly revolutionary after the Schoenberger and the Borchardt/Mauser, not in my opinion anyway. All just different shapes and sizes. Actually, even the Schoenberger cartridge wasn’t especially revolutionary - very much like a lot of revolver rounds, except bottlenecked, and the bottleneck had already been done in rifle rounds. The pistol was revolutionary, though!