M1A Shooter question

[thumbtack]

I am looking for some match ammo suggestions for my M1A. What 168gr Match ammo work best in your M1A?

[Dave P]

Handloads will give the best performance (accuracy). But Fed Gold Match is always the standard, and Black Hills makes some too.

[Steve Smith]

If you are wanting to shoot a lot, forget buying off the shelf ammo. the 168 is good for 200/300 yard shooting, but the 175 is the preferred bullet for 600 yard work.

[DMK]

Does the M1A have a different twist rate than the Garand?

I asked Dean at DGR about match ammo for my .308 Garand and he told me that 155gr. would be more accurate than 168gr. due to the twist rate.

[Steve Smith]

Both are available in several different twist rates. No blanket statements.

If the 155 were that good, Highpower competitors would be using it more. A FEW do, but the majority of .30 cal Service Rifle shooters use a 168 SMK for 200/300 and a 175 for 600.


Seems like I just said this?


Twist rate doesn't make a gun accurate. A fast rate just allows you to shoot a heavier bullet and keep it stabilized. The heavier the bullet, the better it bucks the wind. Sometimes you can get really good results when shooting a lighter bullet in a fast twist. It's conceivable that a 155 would shoot really well in a 1:10 twist barrel and can be pushed faster than a 168, but it still may catch enough wind at 300 that an M1A shooter would prefer the 168 anyway. At 600, it is definite. The 155 is only used in International Palma because it's the rule. No one uses it in American Palma because it eats too much wind (unless they are practicing for Intl Palma). The only reason .30 cal Service Rife shooters aren't using 190s or even heavier bullets is because they break M1As and Garands. The old 180 SMK was about the limit.

[45R]

Federal Gold Match seems to work pretty well for my Standard M1A

[Grump]

Two of the standard, proven M1A loads using the Sierra 168 MK are:

41.5 4064
and
43.0 748

I have shot the first at 2.0 inches, benched at 200 yards with irons. The second, substituting Nosler J4s, has done 7/8-inch at 100 with a scope--trials are continuing because of moly experiments.

"Standard" M1s are 1-10 twist, while "standard" M1A barrels are 1-12, including most GI Match barrels I've seen or heard of. Many aftermarket barrels are available with either twist, and those who want to shoot 1,000 yards more than once every year or three tend to get the 1-10s, at least out in the desert states.

[El Rojo]

Darn, I use 43.0 4064 for my 168s and 42.0 for my 175s. I tried 41.5 and the groups went all to heck.

[Grump]

I'm using GI brass and went up to 42.5 in search of the velocity/accuracy fairy. 41.5 is supposed to be for the GI brass. You using GI or commercial brass?

[DMK]

The heavier the bullet, the better it bucks the wind. Sometimes you can get really good results when shooting a lighter bullet in a fast twist. It's conceivable that a 155 would shoot really well in a 1:10 twist barrel and can be pushed faster than a 168, but it still may catch enough wind at 300 that an M1A shooter would prefer the 168 anyway.

I've picked up a lot of conflicting advice and plan on trying a couple boxes each of 155 and 168 just to see for myself how my rifle shoots with them. However, what you are saying there makes a heck of a lot of sense.

[PO2Hammer]

I've had good luck with Winchester supreme competition. Uses nosler J4 thin jacket.

[larryw]

Grump, lets not forget LC's NM load of 41.5gr of 4895 behind the 168SMK. If your M1A doesn't shoot this load well, there's something wrong.

[Fatelvis]

I agree with Larry, that recipe is hard to beat!

[7.62mm]

I have used these loads for years. Work good in my weapon for matches.

200-300 Yard loads:

168SMK
Cases: LC75 or LC94 Match
Primers: Fed 210M
Powder: Accurate 2320 - 41.6gr

500-600 Yard loads:

175SMK
Cases: LC94 Match (Primer pocket reamed, flash hole deburred, trimmed to 2.005" nominal, sorted by weight, runnout on dial indicator < 3.0)
Primers: Remington 9 1/2
Powder: IMR 4064 - 43.0gr (Each charge weighed)
Overall length: 2.865
5 shot group, 100 yards, 3x9 Tasco Mildot scope, bench rest: 4.48"
(Match grade M1A - Heavy laminated stock, Douglas moly barrell, bedded, not lugged)



Regards,

7.62mm

[Dave P]

See, here's proof that the tasco's cause trouble:

"5 shot group, 100 yards, 3x9 Tasco Mildot scope, bench rest: 4.48"

Back to the loading bench for you, 762!

[Sven]

I got a nice 5-shot 100 yard 0.75" group first time ever shooting my NM M1A with the Lake City M118LR ammo from the CMP e-store (iron sights, rest). Think it can still do better. Pricey stuff, but makes nice brass for future reloading, probably starting with the load Larry mentioned above.

Just picked up 2,500 once-fired National Match LC brass from some nice highpower shooters who no longer shoot 7.62 (one in the US Army Marksmanship Unit)...

Remember to back off on loads with military brass, as the case volume is lower.

[7.62mm]

Dave P.

Yea, that should read .448" five shot group.

And I read the response about ten times and missed it!

I must have a Tasco keyboard.

I have to go back and look at the group every once in a while to confirm I was that lucky. Most of the groups are around .5" to .75"

Good catch.

Regards,

7.62mm

[j.wise]

My M21 can't shoot 150gr for nothing. I loaded it with 168gr ammo and never looked back.

[Grump]

Military brass and 43.0 gr 4064 for a 175-gr?!?! Does that one have a really short bearing surface or something that lets it use loads slightly higher than for the 168 SMK?

I thought the 4895 load for 168s was 40.5 gr.

Heavier bullets buck wind better IF they go fast enough. My 190-gr 7.62mm loads went 2450 fps. After I got the chrono and then got into a ballistics program, I discovered that my 168s had the same wind drift at 600 yards as the 190s. Bummer.

[JW74]

I am looking into buying an M1A very soon. It is the basic model with black synthtic stock and non-match barrel. With good handloads and scope could I still expect somehting in the 3/4-1" group range @ 100 yards or better perhaps?

[dmftoy1]

I'll just throw my .02 and I'm sure someone will correct me. I think on a box stock M1A you're not going to see sub MOA groups. I"m guessing that the guys who are claiming that above have had a fair amount of work done. I would expect 1.5-2 MOA and you might get lucky and get a rifle that does a little better.

Regards,
Dave

[GunTech]

Correct.

Claims to the contrary, IME the standard M1a is a 1-2 MOA rifle. If accuracy is a concern, you are much better off spending a couple of hundred extra for the 'loaded' model, which has a medium weight match bbl, match sights and match trigger. If you want sub MOA, be prepared to spend a lot of money. For that kind of accuracy, it's cheaper to but an AR-10(T).

I'd start with the standard 168gn SMK with 41.5gn 4895. If your rifle won;t shoot this well, chances are it won't shoot anything well.

I have had very good luck with 155gn Lapua Scenars, which match the 175gn SMK in BC but can be driven much faster. The 155 is also much closer to the bullet weights the M1a was designed for.

[30Cal]

Both are available in several different twist rates. No blanket statements.

If the 155 were that good, Highpower competitors would be using it more. A FEW do, but the majority of .30 cal Service Rifle shooters use a 168 SMK for 200/300 and a 175 for 600.

Yeah, but that's just because the 1:10" is what most guys had when they stopped the music and everybody jumped on the AR bus. The 175 was fairly new and the teams shot the 1:10". And so it was. The 155 is a little iffy with the 1:10. These days, when you talk about the majority of M1A .30Cal shooters (guys that are competitive and chasing legs, not just hurling lead downrange), you're looking at maybe eight people.


I shoot a 1:12" heavy Kreiger on mine. For 200yds, I shoot the 125gr TNT and I shoot the 155gr the rest of the way. The difference in drift between the 155 and the 175 is nil.

The 168 is a no brainer for accuracy, but it's not a good choice for a highpower bullet. You don't need the recoil at 200yds and pretty much every other bullet beats it easily in the wind at 600yds. The only time I've shot it in competition in a while was at the 300yd M1A match last summer.


I had a standard grade M1A for a while. The best it ever did with match handloads was 2.5" at 100yds (and that was on a particuarly good day).

[JW74]

Claims to the contrary, IME the standard M1a is a 1-2 MOA rifle. If accuracy is a concern, you are much better off spending a couple of hundred extra for the 'loaded' model, which has a medium weight match bbl, match sights and match trigger. If you want sub MOA, be prepared to spend a lot of money. For that kind of accuracy, it's cheaper to but an AR-10(T).

Thanks for the reply. The reason I was asking about this model is that I have a friend that has had this riffle for about 8 years and he has only fired it a couple of times. It has been in the closet and is in excellent shape. He is going to sell it to me for $650. If I had to but one brand new I would go for the NM model but this was too good of a deal to pass on as the riffle is basically brand new.

My Bushmaster has spoiled me as it will shoot .25-.50 inch groups with good hand loads when I am shooting well. I know I won't see that with this riffle but I was hoping for around 1" at 100 yards. I guess I could use some of the money I save and buy a match grade barrel down the road sometime.

[30Cal]

My Bushmaster has spoiled me as it will shoot .25-.50 inch groups with good hand loads when I am shooting well. I know I won't see that with this riffle but I was hoping for around 1" at 100 yards. I guess I could use some of the money I save and buy a match grade barrel down the road sometime.

The barrel is seldom the limiting factor. It's the one-size-fits-all stock and all the loose stuff hanging off the barrel that's holding it down. Get it bedded and the gas system unitized and it may get pretty close to what you want--probably 1.5MoA or better. A match barrel in a less-than-ideally fitted stock will shoot as well as a GI barrel in the same stock.

$650 is a price you can't afford to pass up on. You'll never ever see one again for less than double that.