Reloading for the Garand

Charlie98 said:

You are missing my point. They are indeed the same powder, but in a traditional list, one is on top of the other... i.e. one is 'slower' than the other.

Click to expand...

Gotcha. Yep, I misunderstood where you were going. Not to speak for @ArchAngelCD, but, the point there is that if the charts don't show that the powders are indeed the exact same formula, e.g. W231/HP-38, then there is no way to know how much faster a given powders burns when compared to another at a different location on the chart. Like you alluded to, some of it is useless for all but the most advanced reloaders, and some of it opens new doors for experimentation.

badkarmamib said:

Gotcha. Yep, I misunderstood where you were going. Not to speak for @ArchAngelCD, but, the point there is that if the charts don't show that the powders are indeed the exact same formula, e.g. W231/HP-38, then there is no way to know how much faster a given powders burns when compared to another at a different location on the chart. Like you alluded to, some of it is useless for all but the most advanced reloaders, and some of it opens new doors for experimentation.

Click to expand...

I went upstairs and got my charts... actually, Western Powders has a very nice linear chart... It's an older chart and doesn't include any of the newer powders, but there are some out there that do.

http://www.accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/burn_rates.pdf

Charlie98 said:

I went upstairs and got my charts... actually, Western Powders has a very nice linear chart... It's an older chart and doesn't include any of the newer powders, but there are some out there that do.

Click to expand...

Have seen similar charts, thanks for posting that. The one that has me VERY intrigued is, according to that, Varget = IMR-4895. Hmmm...

badkarmamib said:

Have seen similar charts, thanks for posting that. The one that has me VERY intrigued is, according to that, Varget = IMR-4895. Hmmm...

Click to expand...

On the other chart I have, it lists Varget equal with IMR4250... slower, even, than IMR4064... which I believe to be closer to the truth. It doesn't give the testing methodology, or even their sources... which is why any burn rate chart has to be taken... with a grain of powder!

One thing that I would recommend is buying a Sierra reloading manual and reading the section on " Gas gun Reloading" I make it part of my yearly reading list before High-power season. I do not know about IMR 4166 or 8202. I would recommend calling Hodgdon. It appears that the burn speed for 4166 is ok 8202 may be just the slightest to fast, again call Hodgdon. The only powders I have ran in my M1's are IMR 4895, 4064, and Accurate Arms 2520.
IMR 4064 is a great powder that is preferred by a lot of competitors I would make your maximum powder charge of IMR4064 47.0Gr. This is because of the M1 runs on port pressure.

Mr.B1852 said:

8202.

Click to expand...

Based on some of the forum feedback I've seen, IMR8208 can get peaky near the top of the charge window.

Old Stumpy said:

I used to shoot a nice Garand a while back.
Mysteriously, after about every 8 rounds it made this loud ping or pang sound and my empty clip flew out of the gun!
Very odd, but somehow convenient.

Click to expand...

And somebody will look at you sideways and say "something just flew off'a his rifle." Seriously, I've had it happen and heard about others.

46grs IMR4895 with a 150gr Hornady flat-base SP. This should be easier on both the rifle and its operator.

I recently got ahold of the Schuster adjustable gas plug. I read good reviews, but can't comment on it yet.

16in50calNavalRifle said:

If my two are any indication, Garands indeed absolutely torture the brass - I spend half of my Garand reloading time just filing away dents and gouges in the rims so I can get them into the shell-holder on the press.

As for "keeping your fingers" - look around on the web for the WWII M1 training films (they're interesting in many ways, anyway). Note that the intended method of loading the en bloc clip, based on the rifle's actual design (bolt does not release until pressure on clip is removed, i.e. when hand/fingers are withdrawing) is quite safe. Of course there is always the fail-safe method using the "blade" of the hand against the op-rod handle - but I have never had a problem using the intended method. Beware ONLY of: the bolt being hung up on the follower, and not truly "locked back". This situation accounts for most unfortunate bolt/finger interactions. Always always check closely to confirm bolt is truly locked back.

Otherwise - enjoy! I don't have as many guns as many on this forum, but I enjoy none more than the M1.

Click to expand...

My experience was dinged case mouth, but I noticed nothing wrong at the rim. Mileage varies. I've heard using an adjustable gas plug, adjusted correctly, can correct this, but I can't say either way at this time.

I learned the "fail-safe" method first. Only potential for awkward is if you shoot left-handed... in and out of hasty sling to reload.

The M1 is a very enjoyable old rifle with a quite storied past.

I saw mention of the Hornady manual, you will find Garand Safe Loads Here. Another good suggestion mentioned would be to Google Master Po which can be found here. Sometimes the latter Master Po pages can take a long time to load, the site has always been that way, no clue why. Now on an interesting note the Master Po pages mention: "Federal GM210M Primers (Master Po has heard the horror stories of Federal match primers in the M1/M1A rifles. If you're squeamish or new to reloading, use Winchester Large Rifle)" as he suggest the sensitive Federal primers. When I load for my Garands or my M1A I like to use the CCI #34 primers which afford a less sensitive magnum large rifle primer using a thicker cup and an anvil set at a different angle. You can try assorted powders and bullets finding what works best for your rifle. As to bullets? When loading serious stuff for match out to 500 yards I like both Sierra and Speer 168 grain JHP match bullets (Sierra #2200 and Speer #2040) and everyday shooting just about any 150 grain FMJ bullets.

Enjoy the rifle as they are really fun to shoot.

Ron

mustanger98 said:

And somebody will look at you sideways and say "something just flew off'a his rifle." Seriously, I've had it happen and heard about others.

46grs IMR4895 with a 150gr Hornady flat-base SP. This should be easier on both the rifle and its operator.

I recently got ahold of the Schuster adjustable gas plug. I read good reviews, but can't comment on it yet.

Click to expand...

This^^^^
Takes all the specific bullet weight/specific powders out of play. No more worrying about bent op rods, bad springs, loads too low to hit a specific pressure curve, etc.
http://www.schustermfg.com/m1-garand-adjustable-gas-plug/
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1...s-plug-with-wrench-m1-garand-steel-parkerized

I've used these for decades in 4 different garands with the last 1 being a 308w tanker.

Reloadron said:

When I load for my Garands or my M1A I like to use the CCI #34 primers which afford a less sensitive magnum large rifle primer using a thicker cup and an anvil set at a different angle.

Click to expand...

Be aware, however, that the #34 is considered a Magnum primer... and your loading should be worked up with that in mind. Do not just switch from a standard primer to the #34, particularly at max loads.

I use the #34 for both my Garand and my M1a (and the #41 small rifle arsenal primer in my AR's...) but I wouldn't normally recommend it for match loads and accuracy loads, unless it just works out that way. The biggest thing you can do is make sure that primer is slightly lower than the case head... just a few thousandths... that alone will alleviate most of the risk of a slam fire in a properly maintained Garand.

Charlie98 said:

Be aware, however, that the #34 is considered a Magnum primer... and your loading should be worked up with that in mind. Do not just switch from a standard primer to the #34, particularly at max loads.

I use the #34 for both my Garand and my M1a (and the #41 small rifle arsenal primer in my AR's...) but I wouldn't normally recommend it for match loads and accuracy loads, unless it just works out that way. The biggest thing you can do is make sure that primer is slightly lower than the case head... just a few thousandths... that alone will alleviate most of the risk of a slam fire in a properly maintained Garand.

Click to expand...

Yes, I pointed that out. Maybe I should have placed more emphasis on that, they are a magnum type primer. As to primers in general I just seat them till they bottom out in the cup. Here is an example of a few with a straight edge on the case heads. They are generally about 0.003" to 0.005" below the case head. The gaps are pretty obvious.



Ron

Reloadron said:

Yes, I pointed that out. Maybe I should have placed more emphasis on that, they are a magnum type primer. As to primers in general I just seat them till they bottom out in the cup. Here is an example of a few with a straight edge on the case heads. They are generally about 0.003" to 0.005" below the case head. The gaps are pretty obvious.

Click to expand...

I mentioned the primer issue because it may not be obvious. I've had primers proud of the pocket even after seating with a hand primer. For those who load on a progressive, they might not be checking the primer seat as closely as with a hand primer. That image is fantastic!

Charlie98 said:

I mentioned the primer issue because it may not be obvious. I've had primers proud of the pocket even after seating with a hand primer. For those who load on a progressive, they might not be checking the primer seat as closely as with a hand primer. That image is fantastic!

Click to expand...

Thanks, when we are retired we have a surplus of time to take pictures.
Hand loading for the M1 Garand can be a rewarding and fun experienced or a train wreck. My best suggestion is about like reloading for anything. Apply good work habits. The rifle can be forgiving but not all that forgiving so good habits and being vigelent as to what is going on is important. That or bad things can happen.

Ron

badkarmamib said:

Have seen similar charts, thanks for posting that. The one that has me VERY intrigued is, according to that, Varget = IMR-4895. Hmmm...

Click to expand...

Charlie98 said:

On the other chart I have, it lists Varget equal with IMR4250... slower, even, than IMR4064... which I believe to be closer to the truth. It doesn't give the testing methodology, or even their sources... which is why any burn rate chart has to be taken... with a grain of powder!

Click to expand...

This is because the burn rate charts give the Relative burn rate, it is not written in stone. Powders will show different speeds when tested in different cartridges. This is a fact, not an Internet rumor.

Understand this, burn rate charts are not a good source for choosing powders, they are only an additional tool. We have gotten way off of the OP and should get back to powders. Actually, I think that has been answered.