Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/30/2003 4:11:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2003 4:43:42 AM EDT by mr_wilson]
The other day I had someone tell me that M1 "Tanker" Garands were converted to 308 in order to eliminate an "overpressure" problem if retained in the original 30-06 caliber.

My Garand is a 30-06 caliber "Tanker" and while I have never heard of the above problem before, thought I ask if any of you have?

I have fired a considerable number of rounds through my rifle without any problems whatsoever, but got to thinking about whether this could be true.

Has anyone heard of this?

If so, could someone explain to me how and why "over-pressure" would be a problem?

Any comments whatsoever on the detremental effects of retaining the original 30-06 caliber in the "Tanker" configuration?

Thanks in advance for the help,
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 6:27:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2003 6:44:17 AM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 7:07:45 AM EDT
Thanks for the op-rod "heads-up" raf, did not know this and do shoot "lefty". That's very nice to know.

As rifle has been substantially "tweaked" by Ron at Smith Enterprise Inc., suspect op-rod has proper relief cut. Op-rod was replaced due to previous owner slapping a new Walnut stock on it and not knowing the difference between the op-rod on standard Garand and the op-rod on a "Tanker", resulting in one badly bent op-rod, causing rifle to malfunction.

I know she shoots and functions like a dream with one very nice 4# 2-stage trigger. It is quite handy, totable and one of my favorite rifles.

I'd never heard of the above either, which was why I thought I'd better ask.

Much obliged,

PS - other "Tanker" comments welcome  
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 5:13:43 PM EDT
Only partially true.

The only danger is to your pocket book if you want to replace it in a collectable rifle.  No one has ever been hurt when one broke, the rifle just stops operating.  From a combat standpoint this is dangerous, but not on the range.  The modification was a post WW2 enhancement when millions of uncut oprods, all of which had survived WW2 without problems, were modifed.

No one in his right mind would modify a highly collectable uncut op rod for a tanker to start with.    If you find an uncut op rod put it away.  I've seen 'em advertised for $175.  The price will only go up.

My Federal Ordnance .30-06 Tanker suffered from severe overpressure in the gas system (oversized gas port) with an extremely rough chamber to add to its woes.  The chamber was so rough and the pressure pushed the action so fast that that the extractor would just routinely rip the rims of the cartridges and leave them in the chamber.  The bolt started to open long before it should have.  First step was smoothing the chamber.

Second step was putting a gas bleed valve (actually a hollow Allen screw) in the gas cylinder plug.  Less expensive than making the gas port smaller.  Once I got the rifle fixed it became too expensive to shoot, so I had Ron Smith rebarrel it to 7.62mm NATO.

Still looking for Vortex for the lil critter.

-- Chuck
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 6:06:35 PM EDT
I fired a Fed Ord newly redone as a tanker a couple years ago. I figure it was equal parts flawed receiver (later analysis showed old, small cracks made worse under pressure) and flawed remodel, but after 30 rounds by the builder and a few by me the back of the receiver broke off and jackhammered into my face. Blood everywhere and I didnt even snap a quick self portrait! Thought I lost an eye for a while there. No more tankers and no more Fed Ord for me.
Link Posted: 12/31/2003 2:35:11 AM EDT
Thanks for the comments, mine is a US Springfield 1942 receiver produce by Fulton Armory orginally and purchased by a HPD Sargent, then by me.

As mentioned above new stock was not inlet properly for the "Tanker", resulting in a major malfunction the second round outta the barrel.
I knew something was amiss immediately and as Ron had done some fine work on a PolyTech M14 for me, he got the call.

He recognized the problem quickly and even return it to Fulton A. when it became apparent it also had a "bad" barrel. (Seems he found out one of his service buds had built the FA refinished "Tanker" originally and the re-barreling cost me nothing, but a bit of time) After re-barreling at Fulton, it was returned to Ron and when it came back to me rifle has functioned "flawlessly" ever since, in the over 7 years I have owned and shot the rifle it has had "ZERO" problems.

As I stocked up years ago with both M2 FMJ and the AP Black-Tip both sold under the "Talon" remanufactured ammo label, I have all I can ever use or need in that department. I also caught a deal about the same time on "enbloc clips" for $0.30 ea. and have hundereds which, while nowhere near enough to match the ammo volume stocked, still leaves me able to shoot fairly inexpensively and all I like.

Kudos to Ron Smith for when it comes to M1s or M1A/M14s he is the man! While his work is not cheap, I'd asked for a consistently reliable shooter and he delivered. While he had suggested the change to 308 NATO, he'd told me he could meet my request in the original caliber without problems and I love my 30-06, she does 1.5-2 MOA consistently using the irons, ya can't ask for more than that. Hell I even like the "ching".

For it's size the "Tanker" is pure pleasure to carry and shoot and it'd be a tough decision whether to grab the AK or the "Tanker" should I ever be forced to choose "one-rifle" to run with.

Appreciate the comments and it's nice to know I have nothing to be concerned about, which is what I thought, given the number of rounds I have fired with it over the years.

Link Posted: 1/2/2004 2:38:30 PM EDT
One of the reasons for cutting the op-rod was for the firing of rifle grenades. The weight of the grenade was causing too much pressure on the op-rod. The cut is a stress releif measure. As Chuck said, uncut op-rods are worth big bucks now.
Top Top