• As some of you know, the old forum database was deleted by the previous administrator. I am attempting to paste any retrievable discussions back into this forum using the internet archive. It won't look pretty - but at least we can preserve some valuable information. Feel free to add to the discussions as these old posts are restored.

Beretta Scope North African Capture M38


Staff member
I have issue a warning.

I'll do you one better.... do you have reputable proof, any proof for that matter, besides bar banter in Leavenworth Kansas( great place, just not exactly the authority on italian small arms of ww2) that 7.35 carcano was not used in any African theater, or no m38 or m38 moschetto ever saw action in Africa? Think about what youre saying for a minute.
It appears you have me laughing quite hard.
Since you are not willing to do the basic research needed to establish provenance, and you can't take pointed critique, please take your rifle somewhere else.

As I stated before....

As a home-made weapon, I won't try to state whether it was assembled during the war. There is no way to know. In terms of value, it matters little. As a collectable, it has little value without a provenance that connects to a significant individual or event during the war. If an individual wishes to purchase a home-made weapon for whatever reason, that is their decision, along with the amount they are willing to pay. If you have a 15k offer on the table, I would take it and run.


New Member

This is exactly the type of defensive, overly sensitive insecurity of someone who appears to be an expert on the surface, but when called out on their B.S falls apart. If you get triggered at my amusement in your ridiculous and absurd unsubstantiated claims, that is your business. You can censor speech all you want... but then be honest about what this forum is. This forum is illegitimate and nothing more than a place for you to counter facts and evidence with a temper tantrum. And for the record, not that it matters, as you may or may not know depending on your reading comprehension ability, I only critiqued your false claims, not your opinions on the rifle, which everyone (is supposed to) be entitled to. You stated many things that were false:
1. No SS in NA. At least you acknowledge this mistake
2. No 7.35 in NA and no m38 in NA. Please at least attempt to back up this claim, but hey, to each their own. If you deny the work of credited historians who cite Italian archives as evidence, im afraid i can't help you.
3. You plainly flat-out misunderstand what im saying quite often. Aldebrano Micheli isn't the owner of this rifle... where did I say he was? I don't own the rifle, a friend does. His email was pointing out how he couldn't ID the scope because, even he, an expert who spent a lifetime studying and publishing resources on the carcano, felt enough humility to admit he isnt qualified to definitively answer certain questions. A lesson that I hoped would serve you well. Alas not the case.

So to summarize, if I offended you by accusing you of citing bar banter as your only source, I'm sorry. I originally posted this piece in the hope that someone credible would be able to give their input on the rifle, which is evident when I initially showed you respect and dignity in your responses, I was more than willing to do. But you seem to disregard facts and credible sources at an alarming rate. An honest criticism of you, and please don't take this to heart, but I suggest being more open minded. You don't know everything. You learned some things during this forum( the reboring of the barrels ). If you want, by all means disregard this and return to your echo chamber on the other forum. But it would do you good to take this as a learning experience. I certainly have.

All the best Jeff


Staff member
MCHammah96 has been banned for offensive language and inability to have a civil discussion.

I hope he takes the carbine to a forum that specializes in these weapons such as Gunboards, Surplus Rifle Forum, or the Military Rifle forum.

I am positive he will receive the same answer as he was presented here on Comando Supremo. I hope he handles it better.

To address his critique in his last post. He can complain about me in a different forum (the life of a moderator).

1. No SS in A.S. If 5-6 individuals can be stated as having SS present in the A.S. theater of operations, then any office with one individual anywhere in at the world means that nationality or group fought in that theater. The inability of MCHammah96 to deal with the reality that for all intents and purpose, there weren't any SS operations of any real scale in A.S. Tunisia was a separate theater and is so treated by the Italian military. A visit to Tobruk in 1942 doesn't traslate to a fact that the SS were in A.S.

2. No 7.35 in A.S. One can't prove a negative. If 7.35 were in A.S. in any numbers, then it is up to MCHammah96 to offer the evidence. Again it is a question of scale. While it is certainly possible that one 7.35mm rifles were used in A.S., they were not in any numbers to be significant.

As important, so what? If there were M38 series weapons in A.S., that doesn't prove that this specific carbine was in A.S. It is a false argument.

3. Who owns the rifle? It didn't matter for this discussion. MCHammah96 was the one trying to establish a provenance for the weapon. MCHammah96 intentionally keep the ownership and location of the weapon to himself. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Since I was discussing the weapon with him, trying to use the third person was a waste of time.

It is always possible an individual brought an unusual weapons into a theater of war. What that requires is the owner (or presenter in this case) to present research that demonstrate that was the case. That never happened. All that was offered was speculation. You can't disprove speculation (the 'anything can happen' argument can't be disproven), so the burden of proof is on the one who is making the claim.

That never happened.

Lets look at the weapon itself.

-If an SS officer wanted to equip himself or his troops with a sniper rifle, why select a Carcano that didn't have a factory developed and tested sniper configuration? Wouldn't a SS officer just tell Sergeant Fritz to go to the armory and pick-up a few 98K with a Zeiss Zielvier 4× (ZF39) telescopic sight, one of the best sniper rifles available?

-Why scope a carbine? This seriously doesn't pass the smell test.

-It is a carbine of a caliber that the Italian military abandoned in 1940. The argument is that the weapon was used in A.S. in mid-late 1942, when 7.35mm weapons were most certainly been out of the inventory if any were present in in 1940 (wear and tear, battle losses, these rifles weren't being replaced, etc).. Is the 7.35mm better than the 7.92mm, especially when fired from a 16"carbine barrel? Again, doesn't pass the smell test.

-The scope. It is big and bulky, and the carbine is likely awkward to fire. If the carbine was selected because it is easier to handle than a full length rifle, why the big, heavy, clumsy scope? Again a serious logic problem.

-The scope has not been identified. MCHammah96 stated an airplane sight. Really? In 1942 the German Army, no excuse me, the SS, are forced to use an airplane sight as a rifle scope?

-The mounts. With the scope off the carbine, those mounts are dangerous when handling the weapon. They can't be removed, and they stick-out with straight and pointed edges. It doesn't make sense. Look at other scoped rifles and how the mounts are attached to the weapon.

-The SS markings. This is know ruse to get the uninformed to buy a weapon at higher prices. No legitimate SS marked Carcano are known. The placement of the SS runes is wrong. As a property mark, they are placed where they can be seen without disassembling the rifle.

Nothing about this carbine makes sense unless bubba decided to do something weird and had these items lying around. That makes sense. Whether bubba was someone after the war or some SS officer that had a few days to kill is unknown.

I am more than happy to be proven wrong. To force me to disprove speculation is not the way to do it. Present the facts, provide the cites, present the research. Posting pictures from Osprey books that make claims but doesn't offer the source of the information is also not the way to do it. Osprey books are well known for their errors. Some authors do some excellent research, but they are not a definitive source by any standard.

The fact that MCHammah96 never offered significant cites is always an indicator that no real research exists. He posted pictures of books, but no page numbers or quotes (Osprey excepted).

He came to CS to fish for validation from individuals he believe would be gullible and want to fawn over a 'rare' rifle.

I haven't locked this thread. If anyone wishes to offer evidence in support of this carbine, please do. MCHammah96 has lost the right to post because of personal attacks.

Pista! Jeff
Last edited: