Armory Sponsor
Posted: 5/20/2017 1:07:13 PM EDT
|
I'm getting ready to reload some 30-06 for use in the M1 Garand rifle. I have an 8 pound jug of IMR4895, CCI #34 primers, LC MATCH brass and 168 gr JHPBT bullets (from Widener's).
Here's the issue - I tested a charge weight of 47.0 gr and an OAL of 3.310" (nominal) but got only 2450 fps, at least 100 fps below what I was expecting. Several loading data sources place 47.0 gr as a max load. Is my chronograph data wrong? Is this a problem of mistaken expectations? Do I just up the charge to get the velocity I should be getting (2550 fps per MIL-Specs)? Feeding and functioning was fine. |
|
There are a few good data sources out there for match loads. I'm sure by the time I go look (some time this evening) someone will have already posted that you very likely can go higher.
Is the extra 100fps that important to you? What if accuracy falls off ? Motor |
Lee FCDs are great tools ! Often misunderstood and sometimes misused but great tools ! :)
|
Where to start.
The rifle is Gas action tuned for 150gr using 4895 as ball powder. If you going to push more pressure with the 168gr, then you need to bleed gas press off so you don't bend the op rod. So on that note, start with a Mccan gas plug to blead off the extra unneeded gas, http://mccannindustries.com/product-line/m1-garand-adjustable-gas-system/ Next, the hot #34 primer is not ideal for any kind of match load. Instead, you should be using Fed 210M primers instead. This primer burns a lot cooler/more uniform instead. Note, understand that the Garand does have a FP block in the action that will prevent the floating FP from reaching the primer until the bolt is fully locked up. It that PITA slot that you have to feed the FP through as you are installing the bolt in the receiver. Lastly, the stock Garand barrel chamber is a lot looser (side wall dimensions) then any bolt gun, so you going to have more blow by at case forming, hence lower working pressures/slightly slower speed that if you are shooting the gun out of a bolt gun instead. To bottom line it, as you are working up the loads with the correct primers to make the barrel sing (and just just going to the fastest loads that may not find their mark instead), make sure that you are adjusting the gas port bleed off as well so the action is not over stroking/opening too fast to bend the opt rod. As for matching mil match ammo, M72 (30/06 Match) bullets are a 173 grain FMJ with an open base, very similar to the original M1 ball bullet that was used from 1925 to 1940 in Military 30/06 ammo. M118 (7.62 NATO Match) bullets are the same M 72 bullet used in the 30/06 Match ammo. M118 Special Ball uses the 173 FMJ. M118 LR" uses the sierra 175 OTM. M852 ammo (7.62 NATO Match) uses a 168 Sierra OTM bullet. |
Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
'Twas not the <cough> sweet and innocent <cough> PlaymoreMinds...
<---skips away in frilly skirts to Candyland, leaving gutters and snorkels FAR behind.
'Twas not the <cough> sweet and innocent <cough> PlaymoreMinds...
<---skips away in frilly skirts to Candyland, leaving gutters and snorkels FAR behind.
|
Originally Posted By Motor1:
There are a few good data sources out there for match loads. I'm sure by the time I go look (some time this evening) someone will have already posted that you very likely can go higher. Is the extra 100fps that important to you? What if accuracy falls off ? Motor It is not a matter of chasing top speed or matching GI loads. I'm trying to stay inside whatever the M1 needs to reliably operate and be reasonably accurate. I am as concerned my chronograph might be off as I am anything else. |
|
Originally Posted By Dano523:
Where to start. The rifle is tuned for 150gr using 4895 as ball powder. If you going to push more pressure with the 168gr, then you need to bleed gas press off so you don't bend the op rod. So on that note, start with a Mccan gas plug to blead off the extra unneeded gas, http://mccannindustries.com/product-line/m1-garand-adjustable-gas-system/ Next, the hot #34 primer is not ideal for any kind of match load. Instead, you should be using Fed 210M primers instead. This primer burns a lot cooler/more uniform instead. Note, understand that the Garand does have a FP block in the action that will prevent the floating FP from reaching the primer until the bolt is fully locked up. It that PITA slot that you have to feed the FP through as you are installing the bolt in the receiver. Lastly, the stock Garand barrel chamber is a lot looser (side wall dimensions) then any bolt gun, so you going to have more blow by at case forming, hence lower working pressures/slightly slower speed that if you are shooting the gun out of a bolt gun instead. To bottom line it, as you are working up the loads with the correct primers to make the barrel sing (and just just going to the fastest loads that may not find their mark instead), make sure that you are adjusting the gas port bleed off as well so the action is not over stroking/opening too fast to bend the opt rod. As for matching mil match ammo, M72 (30/06 Match) bullets are a 173 grain FMJ with an open base, very similar to the original M1 ball bullet that was used from 1925 to 1940 in Military 30/06 ammo. M118 (7.62 NATO Match) bullets are the same M 72 bullet used in the 30/06 Match ammo. M118 Special Ball uses the 173 FMJ. M118 LR" uses the sierra 175 OTM. M852 ammo (7.62 NATO Match) uses a 168 Sierra OTM bullet. I'm stuck working with the components listed. They were purchased several years ago just for this purpose and I already have them "in hand". I was hoping to duplicate that M852 load you show (I wanted something "better" than the crappy, cheap 147 gr FMJ bullets). If I had known better, I would never have purchased these bullets. It's not that these are bad in any way, they probably shouldn't have been my #1 choice. |
|
My favorite Garand load is almost the same as yours, but one grain less powder, and I'm getting just about 2450-2475 fps in 3 different Garands.
FWIW, it does seem just a bit slow but if it's reliable and accurate enough I'd say leave it alone, other than trying SMK's and/or Hornady BTHP Match bullets and different primers if you feel like it. A few FPS slower than expected wouldn't bother me unless I was shooting service rifle out to 600 yards instead of the 100 yard reduced course matches I shoot locally. |
|
Try seating the bullet to 3.250". This works better with 168's and 150's. I use 3.340" when loading 173 grain M118/M72 FMJ's.
I have extensive experience loading .30-06 for Garands. When I first started shooting high power in the early 1980's M1 Garands were still common on the line. The US Army teams were shooting M14's and a lot of civilians had State Rifle & Pistol Association M14's and M1-A's were competing as well. Over the next five years the majority of people were shooting M1-A's. M1 Garands began to fade from the seen. The standard load, and it was full power, was 46.0 grains of IMR-4895 or H4895 using Lake City Brass and Winchester large rifle primers. This load was virtually identical to issue M72 when fired over a chronograph, 2640 fps. OAL was 3.340". Some used a little less, most didn't even experiment. They just loaded it and shot it as. Some rifles really liked these bullets and some wouldn't shoot them well no matter what was tried. My brother's M1 Garand shot them close to 2 moa. I could never get them to do better than 3 moa. I would used 44.5 grains of IMR-4895 when loading these (173 GRAIN m118/m72) bullets and they went exactly 2550 fps when fired from my Garand. Many people opted for Sierra's 168 Match King and simply used the 46 grains of IMR-4895 - M72 powder charge. It shot better for everyone I talked to. At $6.00 a box of 100 the M118/M72 bullets were great for off hand and rapid sitting practice. They were not competitive from my rifle. Many simply used that powder charge across the course, substituting 150's at the 200 yard line and shooting the 168's at 300 and 600. Some even used 125 grain Speer soft points in the 200 yard stage of off hand because they shot very well and didn't kick. I would load 46.0 grains of IMR-4895, seat the 168 grain bullet at 3.250" and go shoot. Check the velocity, but as long as it functions 100% and is accurate I wouldn't worry about it. |
|
Thanks, that is the type of advice and sanity check I was after.
I wasn't busy this afternoon, so I loaded a few of each at 45.0, 46.0, 47.0 and 48.0 gr of IMR 4895. I'll start with the light loads (45.0 gr) and watch the rifle and cases as I go up. I'll shoot them over a chronograph next time I go. If I'm lucky, I may get group size, too. I would not compromise safety, reliability or accuracy for speed, that's for sure. P.S. - six bucks a box = pfft! I wish. 
|
|
Lets forget speed for a second, and just focus on the bullet itself.
The M72, the M118's and the M852 are all Boat tail bullets, and bolt tail bullets do not want to jump much to lands before they pitch a bitch. Ideally, you want less than .008" jump to lands to keep them happy. Since you have both a stock barrel for M2 ammo, and limited by the COL of the round that will self cycle through the action, the first thing you need to determine if the OAL lenght of the round loaded for say a less than a .008" jump, will even fit into the receiver in the loaded clips. To be blunt, a lot of the Garand NM rigs had short throated chambered barrels to take advantage of the Match ammo, and in say a JG match, is not surprising to see a stock rig shoot better with M2 ammo with it flat base bullet at longer ranges, then with M72 or M118 type ammo with it boat tail design instead. Throw in the M852 bullet will even a longer Ogive, and you could be fighting a losing battle. So for say sled'g during prone, you can long load the M852 type bullets to pull off the min jump to lands while single loading, and should be able to get the rifle to shoot well via ladder loading to get the barrel to sing (depending on the condition of the barrel and just how much NM'g you have done to the rig to uniform the harmonics). As for coming out of the clip with the ammo loaded to standard COL, you going to have a long jump with the M852 bullet (longer ogive design that the M72 or M118) , and may be better off with a flat tail bullet that likes to jump for rapids instead; especially if the throat is reading high numbers on a erosion gauge. |
Posted By PlaymoreMinds:
'Twas not the <cough> sweet and innocent <cough> PlaymoreMinds...
<---skips away in frilly skirts to Candyland, leaving gutters and snorkels FAR behind.
'Twas not the <cough> sweet and innocent <cough> PlaymoreMinds...
<---skips away in frilly skirts to Candyland, leaving gutters and snorkels FAR behind.
|
Dano,
Can you summarize the thought process into a preferred recipe? Bullet - (maker, weight, type) OAL - (seating depth for magazine fed ammo) Case - Primer - Fed 210M Powder - (maker, type) Charge weight - (grains) I have a TON of these 168 gr MIL-SPEC bullets but I also have some 155 gr Sierra Palma bullets, some 147 gr FMJBT, and 100 of the 173 gr FMJBT (pulled bullets purchased from DCM/CMP sales from two decades ago). Maybe I'll make up some loads using those, too. I have to drill and tap a case to fit my Stoney Point OAL head space gage to find out where the lands are. I suspect they are out of reach. |
|
I have an article written by John R. Clark from the March 1986 issue of The American Rifleman.
This is a well respected write up on reloading for the M1 Garand. There are loads listed for 150gr, 168gr, 180gr, 190gr and 200gr bullets. Any talk of shooting anything other than 150gr is going to damage your rifle is simply hog wash. It's all about gas port pressure period. The loads listed for the 168gr Sierra match bullets using IMR-4895 range from 46.5 to 47.5gr The velocity average is around 2650fps The Hornady 8th edition has a maximum of 47.1gr at 2600fps So it does seem your velocity is kind of low for some reason. Motor |
Lee FCDs are great tools ! Often misunderstood and sometimes misused but great tools ! :)
|
Dano your first post doesn't make much sense. First you state the rifle is "tuned" for 150s
Then you list several 173gr match loads which BTW were favorites of many M1 Garand competitors. In the article I mentioned above the author states that the Garand's ejection direction, this is the direction of where the ejecting casings go is determined by bolt speed. The faster the bolt speed the more forward the ejection direction. He then lists the direction of ejection of the loads he tested in the article. The 150s produced the fastest bolt speed. Each progressively heavier bullet produced slower bolt speed with the 200gr loads ejecting at 4 o'clock. I have to think that slower bolt speed means lower not higher gas port pressure. So if the bolt speed and therefore gas port pressure is lower how can this bend op rods? BTW: The author's favorite match loads used Sierra 180gr Match Kings because they closely duplicated the 173gr M72. Motor |
Lee FCDs are great tools ! Often misunderstood and sometimes misused but great tools ! :)
|
Originally Posted By Motor1:
The loads listed for the 168gr Sierra match bullets using IMR-4895 range from 46.5 to 47.5gr The velocity average is around 2650fps The Hornady 8th edition has a maximum of 47.1gr at 2600fps So it does seem your velocity is kind of low for some reason. Motor |
|
Working on the theory this IMR4895 discrepancy is a record keeping error, today's job is to disassemble some of the test rounds and re-weigh the powder charge. Did I simply mislabel the charge weight?
Different (related) topic - In my load test data I am noticing a distinct difference between Hodgdon's H4895 and the IMR4895. Many others have noted this, too, but they days of simply substituting one for the other are (seemingly) gone. I measured this for H4895 (which I am not using): 44.0 gr - 2461 fps (took me 47.0 gr IMR4895 to get this speed) 46.0 gr - 2547 fps (this is my goal) 47.0 gr - 2694 fps (yikes!) |
|
Originally Posted By Dano523:
Where to start. The rifle is tuned for 150gr using 4895 as ball powder. If you going to push more pressure with the 168gr, then you need to bleed gas press off so you don't bend the op rod. So on that note, start with a Mccan gas plug to blead off the extra unneeded gas, http://mccannindustries.com/product-line/m1-garand-adjustable-gas-system/ Next, the hot #34 primer is not ideal for any kind of match load. Instead, you should be using Fed 210M primers instead. This primer burns a lot cooler/more uniform instead. Note, understand that the Garand does have a FP block in the action that will prevent the floating FP from reaching the primer until the bolt is fully locked up. It that PITA slot that you have to feed the FP through as you are installing the bolt in the receiver. Lastly, the stock Garand barrel chamber is a lot looser (side wall dimensions) then any bolt gun, so you going to have more blow by at case forming, hence lower working pressures/slightly slower speed that if you are shooting the gun out of a bolt gun instead. To bottom line it, as you are working up the loads with the correct primers to make the barrel sing (and just just going to the fastest loads that may not find their mark instead), make sure that you are adjusting the gas port bleed off as well so the action is not over stroking/opening too fast to bend the opt rod. As for matching mil match ammo, M72 (30/06 Match) bullets are a 173 grain FMJ with an open base, very similar to the original M1 ball bullet that was used from 1925 to 1940 in Military 30/06 ammo. M118 (7.62 NATO Match) bullets are the same M 72 bullet used in the 30/06 Match ammo. M118 Special Ball uses the 173 FMJ. M118 LR" uses the sierra 175 OTM. M852 ammo (7.62 NATO Match) uses a 168 Sierra OTM bullet. 1. The M1 was designed for M1 ball (original 173 gr bullet) not M2 ball which designed later. 2. IMR-4895 did not exist when the M1 rifle was adopted. 4895 was first manufactured and loaded into USGI cartridges in 1944 IIRC. 3. The M1 will shoot 168-175 gr match bullets all day without bending the op rod so long as the rifle is properly greased and the loads closely approximate the velocity and port pressure of M72 match. OP: Hodgdon Powder shows a START load of 48 gr IMR-4895 and velocity of 2719 fps with regular brass. I would reduce that start load by 1 grain for LC and other USGI brass and work up from there. My typical load for 168 gr bullets is 47.5 gr IMR-4895. Many others like to shoot a slower load, some like faster - it depends on which accuracy node you are chasing. |
|
Originally Posted By dcat:
OP: Hodgdon Powder shows a START load of 48 gr IMR-4895 and velocity of 2719 fps with regular brass. I would reduce that start load by 1 grain for LC and other USGI brass and work up from there. My typical load for 168 gr bullets is 47.5 gr IMR-4895. Many others like to shoot a slower load, some like faster. Next range trip I'm shooting a range of loads from 46 to 48 gr, so I will find out what it takes to get 2550 fps. Lore - I remember reading that IMR4895 was specifically made for the M1. Is that correct/incorrect? |
|
Regarding primers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using CCI #34 primers if that is what you have or what you like.
In fact, the ONLY primer I would NOT use for M1 Garand loads is the Federal 210M Gold Medal Match primer, because when I was regularly shooting the Garand in Highpower, the Federal 210M were known to be the most sensitive and therefore the most likely to slamfire. The one and only slamfire I had with an M1 occurred with Federal 210M primers. Regardless of primer used: 1. Ensure the brass is fully resized and fits the chamber easily without resistance 2. Ensure the primer pockets are clean and previous primer crimp is removed 3. Ensure the primer is fully seated and sets flush or below flush 4. Load from the follower so the bolt does not slam forward 5. ALWAYS make sure the muzzle of the rifle is pointed down range and down towards the ground while loading Regards, dcat |
|
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
I saw the Hodgdon data but it is so high it strikes me as bolt gun-only load data not for use in an M1. Next range trip I'm shooting a range of loads from 46 to 48 gr, so I will find out what it takes to get 2550 fps. Lore - I remember reading that IMR4895 was specifically made for the M1. Is that correct/incorrect? I cannot speak for IMR, but it makes sense that IMR-4895 was developed as an improved propellant for the Garand. |
|
Originally Posted By dcat:
M72 velocity (with the 173 gr bullet) was 2640 fps measured 78 feet from the muzzle. IIRC, the muzzle velocity would be about 100 fps higher. I cannot speak for IMR, but it makes sense that IMR-4895 was developed as an improved propellant for the Garand. I went to the CMP Forum last night and there wasn't a lot there, either and what they had was scattered all over the place. IMR - Improved Military Rifle |
|
When people reload for Garand, most are shooting for multiple MOA accuracy, not the sub MOA accuracy most of us expect in modern rifles. I think most of us find a load that cycles and rings steel at a few hundred yards and call it good. As stated above, many dont even work up loads, they just got a recipe from a buddy and that's that.
I like Varget in mine but I rebarreled the one I shoot with new barrel. I havent even tested load in GI barrel so no idea what results you might see in those. Another fact that prevents most from experimenting in Garand loads is the risk you take with pressure. Thus most data you see is standard 4895, 4064. Most forum threads I found when I was searching was which of those is better. ha! Good luck with your goals. |
|
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Wouldn't it be useful to have all this M1 reloading data in one spot. "Everybody knows that." Except, as the information ages, bullets, primers and powders evolve, it is could be in danger of being lost. Lost only in the sense of no one using it, maintaining it, keeping it up to date. I went to the CMP Forum last night and there wasn't a lot there, either and what they had was scattered all over the place. IMR - Improved Military Rifle Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By dcat:
M72 velocity (with the 173 gr bullet) was 2640 fps measured 78 feet from the muzzle. IIRC, the muzzle velocity would be about 100 fps higher. I cannot speak for IMR, but it makes sense that IMR-4895 was developed as an improved propellant for the Garand. I went to the CMP Forum last night and there wasn't a lot there, either and what they had was scattered all over the place. IMR - Improved Military Rifle CMP Forum Reloading Data and Ammo Info |
|
You know, it's not the chamber pressures that damage the M1 Garands. It's the gas port pressures. That's why you need to use powders close to IMR 4895 burn rates.
Check out the burn rate charts (they vary based on which powder maker's website you visit) or look up a list of suitable powders. The data I use/saved says IMR3031 is the fastest burning powder you should use and XMR 4064 is the slowest burning powder you should use. What's in between those should be okay. In the 30.06, for the M1 Garand, I've used TAC, H4895, IMR 4895, and Varget. I pretty much settled on IMR4895 but there are others that will work. After WW2 (check out Hatcher's Book of the Garand) they did some testing to see why no M1's were reported to have blown up during the war. Interesting. They finally managed to "blow" one up, which was really a failure of the case back near the base, not a failure of the rifle. As the worked the pressures up they eventually got to a high enough pressure they became afraid of damaging their big pressure test guns at the arsenal, so they stopped shooting the loads in them. By that time they felt they had enough data they could figure out the pressures based on the effects of the previous increases in powder. After they stopped firing the test rounds in the pressure test guns they continued to fire them in the M1 Garand test rifle and an Arisaka rechambered to 30.06. Well, the eventually blew up the Arisaka rifle and the M1 kept going. When they finally got to the point that the brass case failed and vented pressure into the rifle (destroyed the stock, and the trigger housing/floor plate and slightly bulged the bolt body) they were, if my memory is correct, up around 185,000 psi, by their calculations. the put the rifle action (with the bulged bolt) in a new stock with a new trigger housing and continued to shoot standard pressure 30.06 rounds through it till they got tired of shooting it and it just kept working. John Garand knew what the hell he was doing. That history/tale is in no way brought up to encourage people to run hot loads through their M1 Garands. It's just a bit of history from Gen. Hatcher. Port pressure. Keep port pressure where it should be and you won't be damaging the op rod. |
How you live your life is important. Just be sure the memory of how you died doesn't overshadow the tales of how you lived your life.
Global Warming Hoax Skeptic before it was cool
Joined:
Jun 2007
Posts:
45534
EE: 100% (1)
WA, USA
|
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Wouldn't it be useful to have all this M1 reloading data in one spot. "Everybody knows that." Except, as the information ages, bullets, primers and powders evolve, it is could be in danger of being lost. Lost only in the sense of no one using it, maintaining it, keeping it up to date. I went to the CMP Forum last night and there wasn't a lot there, either and what they had was scattered all over the place. IMR - Improved Military Rifle When in this forum, it will be listed under My Topics for you as you are the OP. So next time this subject of M1 handloads comes up, it will be a race between you and me to be the first to link this thread. 
|
Selling agent for Algores carbon credit scam.
Shooting and Reloading, one hobby feeds the other.
Shooting and Reloading, one hobby feeds the other.
|
I reviewed a lot of that data. Some of it is crazy! 41.5 gr IMR4895 * 168 gr = 2650 fps???
Master Po's Temple was not accessible. I hope that situation is temporary. I've found a lot of other goofy data, too. My plan is to do some additional testing and post the results. I can compare the results to other published data (web sites and magazine articles). |
|
Sir:
Look there is no reason to make this complicated.................. Pick one of these powders: -4985 IMR or H. -4064 -Varget. Pick a bullet from 150 to 175. If you compete short range.... try the 110's-150's. Unless you're shooting out 600yds+, you don't need anything more than the 168's. If you go past that........ use one of the 175's and be done. If you are shooting a 30 06 M1, don't expect MOA results. The rifle (unless you carefully match condition it) isn't all that. Load up to 46-47 grains (30-06)........... and somewhere you'll find good accuracy for the rifle you have. Don't worry about matching "mil-spec" or chasing velocity. Don't worry about what the US 173gr bullet will or won't do. There are WAY better bullets out there now (ie 168's) and so comparing anything to it is pointless. If you have some, sell them to the guys for their collection. Find an accurate load and be done. |
|
Originally Posted By TGH456E:
Sir: Look there is no reason to make this complicated.................. Pick one of these powders: -4985 IMR or H. -4064 -Varget. Pick a bullet from 150 to 175. If you compete short range.... try the 110's-150's. Unless you're shooting out 600yds+, you don't need anything more than the 168's. If you go past that........ use one of the 175's and be done. If you are shooting a 30 06 M1, don't expect MOA results. The rifle (unless you carefully match condition it) isn't all that. Load up to 46-47 grains (30-06)........... and somewhere you'll find good accuracy for the rifle you have. Don't worry about matching "mil-spec" or chasing velocity. Don't worry about what the US 173gr bullet will or won't do. There are WAY better bullets out there now (ie 168's) and so comparing anything to it is pointless. If you have some, sell them to the guys for their collection. Find an accurate load and be done. The thing is, this is a reloading forum and I ran into a reloading anomaly. It hasn't stopped me from shooting my reloads, it's just fun to investigate, ... to figure it out and fix it and maybe learn something along the way. |
|
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
I reviewed a lot of that data. Some of it is crazy! 41.5 gr IMR4895 * 168 gr = 2650 fps??? Master Po's Temple was not accessible. I hope that situation is temporary. I've found a lot of other goofy data, too. My plan is to do some additional testing and post the results. I can compare the results to other published data (web sites and magazine articles). |
|
Originally Posted By borderpatrol:
41.5 gr. of IMR-4895 with a 168 doing 2650 fps is a HOT load from Lake City 7.62x51mm brass, not .30-06. I had a serious case of 30-06 on the brain when I was looking around.
Here's another from that same source - M72 Cal .30 MATCH: 173 gr bullet; 47 gr IMR 4895; 2640±30 fps This speed is typical of data from numerous sources and is why I feel my data is anomalous. I may get up to the range this weekend and can do my supplementary testing. |
|
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
In many respects, your post is spot on. Heck, I could (and have) just purchased CMP ammo. However, relative to the original issue I raised, you may have missed the point entirely. The thing is, this is a reloading forum and I ran into a reloading anomaly. It hasn't stopped me from shooting my reloads, it's just fun to investigate, ... to figure it out and fix it and maybe learn something along the way. But my first suggestion is .....Don't worry about it if the accuracy is there. My second point is there seems to be comments using M72 as some sort of gold standard or something. It isn't..... shoot for accuracy first and velocity second. With your bullets in your rifle. My final point to repeat it, the M1 Garand isn't a MOA match rifle. So I wouldn't get too caught up on loading for it. |
|
As I ready for my range trip for testing, that one remaining neuron of mine fired.
I loaded some cartridges with 168 gr MatchKing bullets using 47.0 gr of IMR 4895. These will clarify whether it is the MIL-SPEC bullet that's causing the anomaly or if it's something else. If the SMK's shoot with the proper speed and the MIL-SPEC's do not,... I'm looking forward to going to the range, no matter the outcome of the tests.
|
| I'm using nearly the same load as you, 46.0-46.5gr since they're just thrown from the powder dispenser-no trickling. 168 Nosler CC's, CCI 34's, old military brass (KA, PS, TS). I don't have my notes but the velocities were not as "fast" as I expected either. 200 yd accuracy and function are the main goals. |
|
Originally Posted By smoothy8500:
I'm using nearly the same load as you, 46.0-46.5gr since they're just thrown from the powder dispenser-no trickling. 168 Nosler CC's, CCI 34's, old military brass (KA, PS, TS). I don't have my notes but the velocities were not as "fast" as I expected either. 200 yd accuracy and function are the main goals. Originally Posted By smoothy8500:
I'm using nearly the same load as you, 46.0-46.5gr since they're just thrown from the powder dispenser-no trickling. 168 Nosler CC's, CCI 34's, old military brass (KA, PS, TS). I don't have my notes but the velocities were not as "fast" as I expected either. 200 yd accuracy and function are the main goals. Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
I would not compromise safety, reliability or accuracy for speed, that's for sure. |
|
Which chronograph do you have? Some of them need to be treated differently with larger rifle cartridges. A blast shield and longer distance from the muzzle are two common techniques that help with several chronograph models.
If you have a solid "favorite" load that is consistently accurate in a specific gun, regardless of whether it's a rifle or pistol load, you could run some of them over the chronograph and see if it's giving you consistent numbers or not. Different devices will need different levels of attention and sometimes you'll need different techniques for setup to make sure you get consistently accurate readings of your velocity. If you doubt your measurement devices, definitely take the time to verify that the devices are being used properly and that they are working correctly. |
"--you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
Heinlein
NRA Life Member
Glock Certified Armorer
Certified AR15 Armorer
Certified M1911 Armorer
Heinlein
NRA Life Member
Glock Certified Armorer
Certified AR15 Armorer
Certified M1911 Armorer
|
I'm going to start a different thread to discuss chronography and the processing of the test data. I want to keep this thread about the M1 reloads.
All the loads, from 45.0 to 48.0 gr, fed, fired and functioned perfectly with no signs of excessive pressure whatsoever, not even the 48.0 gr loads. |
Armory Sponsor