T/C contender. An excellent point. I can get a 14 inch Contender pistol in .22 Hornet and test that, rather than butchering a rifle and still not getting it quite right.
Reason for the need to get this thing nailed down and the reason I need unusual data on it is a bit off topic for this forum, but I will very briefly lay it out, as the question has been asked.
I’ve been digging deep into the ballistics and forensics of the JFK assassination. At first, in working through all the nasty bits related to the head shot, I thought I might wind up vindicating the Warren Commission. But as I worked back through the time scale and overlayed various types of evidence things got progressively wierd.
When I dug into the shot that hit JFK in the upper back / base of the neck I ran into something I really didn’t expect. I found that the entry wound was small enough to be inconsistent with the 6.5, that the wound itself was far less severe than should be expected with a medium power FMJ, that there was no evidence that the bullet did any damage after exiting via the president’s necktie knot, and that the impulse on the DPD dictabelt didn’t match those of the known medium power rifle shot impulses. When I dug into the DPD dictabelt using Cornell’s Raven Lite acoustic analysis software I found five similarly-shaped forms on the spectrograph. Three correspond to times at which there is reason to suspect a shot has been fired (behaviors, etc). Two are still kinda hanging around with no supporting evidence that I’ve been able to locate. In a nutshell, what I suspect I might be seeing in the evidence are indicators that a low power small caliber weapon was fired five times at JFK between the time the limo was about halfway through its turn from Houston onto Elm and the time of the back/neck shot. The only way this makes sense is if the energy was low and the muzzle report just intense enough to be captured on the dictabelt recording. You can find more info on the reasons I’m making these statements and my process or working through the various elements on my website, kegisland.com.
I want to stress that I’m not trying to spin a new theory. I’m just trying to square the evidence. It’s really the evidence itself that’s stubbornly presenting a very odd picture of what was actually flying through the air during the assassination.
My interest in the M4 is due to:
-Credible claims that I am in process of evaluating that its FMJ bullet roughly matches the general description of the stretcher bullet a Parkland Hospital administrator received from one of his orderlies. This administrator pointedly stated that this bullet did not look like the 6.5 later presented to him by investigators seeking to confirm witness statements and chain of custody of evidence.
-The odd combination of a relatively strong muzzle report for the Hornet and a relatively low terminal ballistic effect for the Hornet in evidence related to the assassination. A short barrel woud tend to swing these elements in those directions.
-The fact that the Hornet itself is arguably the best chambering of its day for reliable and accurate low power small caliber rifle work, due in large part to its low case volume and very tight throat design.
-The compact nature of the M4
-The relative ease with which the M4 might have either been fitted with optics or used with open iron.
-The fact that both rifle and cartridge were available as proven factory-made products.
-The simple fact that in order to conduct acoustic testing of this general type of cartridge, I need to work with a standard – so I might as well chose the standard that seems most likely to fit the evidence insofar as I currently understand it.
Please understand that I fully understand there is no way I can prove that either this particular cartridge or rifle was in use. I just need to either show a correspondence or lack of correspondence between the acoustic fingerprints of this combination and the signatures I’ve isolated on the DPD dictabelt. Either way, the data leads to the truth – and that’s what I’m after, no matter what it turns out to be.
Okay. That should do. I don’t mean to be obscure in my questions, but I do want to stick to the core purposes of this forum, and that is a big reason I simply began with the technical questions at hand rather than getting into the context.