CE 2562

[John Tonkovich]

Why else would they send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch? We know that they had just received 100 40 inch rifles the month before.

We do not "know" they sent a 40" rifle.
We do not "know " they received 100 40" rifle; the point of this whole topic I started was to determine, through examining CE 2562, which rifles were received.

[Tim Nickerson]

We do not "know" they sent a 40" rifle.
We do not "know " they received 100 40" rifle; the point of this whole topic I started was to determine, through examining CE 2562, which rifles were received.

We do know that they sent a 40 inch rifle because the Carcano bearing serial number C2766 is a 40 inch rifle.

[Tim Nickerson]

April and February were just the cover dates on those editions of the magazine. The February edition would have been on store shelves probably as early as December. The April edition would have likely been on store shelves in February.

Nice theory, but there isn't a shred of evidence that this was the case for the American Rifleman. One can imagine that they would print and distribute the magazine somewhere in January to get it in the shops in the actual month. But if - as you say - it was in the stores in December, the magazine would have had to be printed in November, requiring the advertisers having to submit their adverts four months ahead of time. That simply does not make any sense, but even if we assume that you are correct, that would mean IMO the Klein's would have had to make sure that they had sufficient stock in store as they could not risk running out of rifles before the date of the magazine.

If Klein's still had the 36 inch model in stock in March, then they would have shipped one of those to Oswald instead of the 40 inch.

That's the same circular argument that John refered to in his last post.

The mere fact that Klein's shipped out a 40" rifle (if that is indeed what happened) is in now way proof that they had run out of 36" rifles. Like many other businesses, Klein's was dealing with people (like for instance collectors) who ordered a specific type and model rifle because that's the exact one they wanted. You just can not simply send them another rifle than the one ordered. It doesn't work like that now, nor did it back then. Besides, there is no evidence whatsoever that Klein's had run out of 36" rifles.

I'm not saying that the February edition was definitely in stores in December. I'm just saying that it probably was and was almost certainly on store shelves in January.

Again, I don't know why else Klein's would send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch, other than human error. if it was a mess up on their part then Oswald could have complained about getting an "upgrade". I doubt that he even realized that he did. 

[Martin Weidmann]

We do know that they sent a 40 inch rifle because the Carcano bearing serial number C2766 is a 40 inch rifle.

Are you 100% sure that serial number was exclusive to only a 40" MC rifle?

I'm not saying that the February edition was definitely in stores in December. I'm just saying that it probably was and was almost certainly on store shelves in January.

Again, I don't know why else Klein's would send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch, other than human error. if it was a mess up on their part then Oswald could have complained about getting an "upgrade". I doubt that he even realized that he did. 

I'm not saying that the February edition was definitely in stores in December. I'm just saying that it probably was and was almost certainly on store shelves in January.

That doesn't make the point I am making any different. When you have a business and are advertising in a magazine dated February 1963, no matter when it hits the store shelves, it might be a good thing that you ensure that you have enough stock to fill orders for a particular item. Also, if it was not uncommon for Klein's to send a 40" rifle when a 36" was ordered, then why did they bother with the Department coding in the first place?

Again, I don't know why else Klein's would send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch, other than human error.

I also don't know why they would send a 40" rifle instead of the 36" ordered. It seems a bad business practice to do so. Far better would be to inform the client that they had run out of 36" and offer him a 40" or his money back.

Human error is indeed a possibility, although it seems unlikely as Klein's employees William Sharp and Mitch Westra, who worked in the gun department, have both stated to HSCA investigators that Klein's did not sell 40" MC rifles with a four power scope mounted on it.

Another remarkable comment of William Sharp to the HSCA is that he mounted scopes on at least 12 duplicate rifles for the FBI.

[John Iacoletti]

Are you 100% sure that serial number was exclusive to only a 40" MC rifle?

It sure would have been nice to see the rest of that “missing” microfilm, huh?

[John Tonkovich]

We do know that they sent a 40 inch rifle because the Carcano bearing serial number C2766 is a 40 inch rifle.

We know there is a 40" rifle -serial #C2766 - in the National Archives.

Not much else.


Addendum: the WC presents paperwork that alleges:
A Hidell ordered a 36" rifle.
A Hidell received a 40" rifle, with a "unique" serial number.
Lifschutz Fast Freight shipped 100 rifles, weighing 750 lbs.

[Jack Trojan]

This one seems pretty straightforward. We need to examine the weight of CE 2562 and determine its accuracy. If we added up the weight of 100 rifles and added the weight of the container there is no way in hell it would come to exactly 750 lbs.

750 lbs was obviously an estimate based on each rifle being 7.5 lbs, excluding the container, regardless whether it was accurate or actually weighed. EOS.

[John Tonkovich]

This one seems pretty straightforward. We need to examine the weight of CE 2562 and determine its accuracy. If we added up the weight of 100 rifles and added the weight of the container there is no way in hell it would come to exactly 750 lbs.

750 lbs was obviously an estimate based on each rifle being 7.5 lbs, excluding the container, regardless whether it was accurate or actually weighed. EOS.

Excluding the container.

So shipping companies don't charge by weight?
Instead, they ..feel sympathetic, and let the customer only pay for the weight of the items they are selling?
Interesting.
Can you provide examples of such practices?