30.06 or 308 for a Garand?

[nbkky71]

I own and shoot M1s in both .30/06 and 7.62X51 and do so with surplus and commercial ammunition.

I had an accurized M1 built in .308 and occassionally shoot it in NRA/CMP highpower matches. I had it built in .308 so I could share ammo with my M1A. I also have several M1's in the original .30-06 caliber and use them to shoot JCG matches.

Unless you have a need to go with .308, I'd stick with .30-06

 

[HKGuns]

Actually Mr. Garand originally designed the rifle for the .276 Pedersen cartridge.

You are correct of course, but you know what I meant.

 

[joeschmoe]

I am not sure about some of what you are saying. To the best of my knowledge, every M1 Garand manufactured, with the exceptions of early development rifles was chambered in 30-06. That includes the NM rifles built in the late 50s. Now if that is correct then any M1 Garand chambered in 7.62 NATO is a conversion. No original M1 Garand left a US arsenal (Springfield Armory) or contractor's factory ( Winchester WWII) or H&R (Harrington Richardson), IHC (International Harvester) post WWII chambered in 7.62 NATO. While in 1964 the Springfield Armory did a REPORT OF EVALUATION ON NAVY CONVERSION 0F RIFLE, U. S. CAL . 30, Ml TO FIRE 7 .62MM AMMUNITION BY MODIFICATION TO THE BARREL, I don't believe the conversions were actually done by the Springfield Armory. The report did pretty much show that a barrel sleeve was not a good idea and that the best approach was to use a barrel originally cut and chambered in 7.62 NATO. These conversions were also taking place long after the last M1 Garand was produced.

As to not converting a M1 Garand to .308 I see no reason not to. The rifles manufactured during WWII have a high collector value but only if the rifle is 100% correct as to each and every part. In the case of an early 100% correct rifle then yes, it would be foolish to convert a sought after collectable. However, the recent CMP rifles classified as "Correct Grade" were in the serial number range of 5.4 to 5.8 million making them well post Korea rifles starting around maybe 6/54. While a rifle like this may be correct as to parts these later rifles really don't command much of a premium as to collector value. Even their stocks at that point were the standard DoD cartouche. Rifles like these in my opinion are shooters rather than sought after collectables. The IHC and H&R rifles do command a slight premium of the later rifles simply because there were fewer produced. Again, even on these rifles they must be correct as to all parts to be of any value to a collector.

So in conclusion I see nothing wrong with converting a later 1950s rifle to the 7.62 NATO chambering. A serious collector is not likely to have much interest in the rifle anyway. If the rifle is to be enjoyed as a shooter it matters not in my opinion and granted just my opinion.

Just My Take
Ron

Reread my post.

I said "original" 30.06... but if you build a new one... CMP or Fulton will build you a .308 or 30.06. With out the conversion chamber insert. With a newly made gun you can have it made with a real .308 barrel or a real 30.06 barrel... for a NEW Garand.

 

[Reloadron]

Reread my post.

I said "original" 30.06... but if you build a new one... CMP or Fulton will build you a .308 or 30.06. With out the conversion chamber insert. With a newly made gun you can have it made with a real .308 barrel or a real 30.06 barrel... for a NEW Garand.

Now I understand what you were saying, understanding the original 30-06 part. Sorry I misunderstood.

Ron

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
Actually Mr. Garand originally designed the rifle for the .276 Pedersen cartridge.

You are correct of course, but you know what I meant.

Well, yes and no. Pedersen had convinced Ordnance to adopt his .276 cartridge -- one of his reasons being that his rifle design proved incapable of handling the more powerful .30-06. Garand was therefore forced to design his rifle around that round.

But when MacArthur overrode Ordnance (for very good reasons), Pedersen dropped out and Garand redesigned his rifle for the .30-06.

Consequently, there are only a pair of tool room models in .276, and millions of Garands redesigned and re-dimensioned for .30-06. So it is not wrong to say the M1 (which was what the rifle was designated upon actual adoption) was designed for the .30-06.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

.06 beats .308 in the M-1 AND lawfully, m2 .30/06 AP ammo is exempt by SPECIFIC ATF ruling but NOT .308. Minor in most places, but in some places (like my IL home) the .308 AP ain't legal - but .06 is. Plus , you can get .06 from the CMP at good prices and at days end, .06 is about 8-9 % more powerful. Plus, to me, the .06 recoil feels more elongated and softer. .
.308 is a fine caliber ~ the son of the .06. But here in the US, .06 is still 'king of the hill' in terms of number of cartridges produced for the civie market; so it makes sense in that regard too.

 

[USSR]

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

Uh, don't be so sure about that. Years ago I bought one of those inserts, and couldn't get it to work with several rifles I owned. I sent it back and got a replacement, and that one didn't work either.

Don

 

[anothernewb]

Have to say, a buddy bought one of the CMP garands chambered in 308 and it is a really, really nice rifle. It's not a historical piece by any means but it sure is enjoyable to shoot, and very accurate. Handles off the shelf ammo with ease

 

[Neo-Luddite]

USSR: in fairness, I've got one but have not wanted to use it as I prefer .06 and didn't have much interest in playing with it unless needed in a ammo shortage pinch. Thanls for the insight. BTW - if you have time -why didn't it work do you think?

 

[Reloadron]

The 30-06 cartridge has MAXIMUM CARTRIDGE / MINIMUM CHAMBER specifications which can be seen here with the cartridge specifications. All of the dimensions are subject to allowable tolerances. So chamber dimensions can vary from rifle to rifle but still be in tolerance. This makes it a little difficult to make a one size fits all chamber adapter or sleeve. Thus chamber adapters can prove to be unreliable depending on the dimensions of the chamber it is inserted in. Another problem is the bullet jump, the distance the bullet travels before it engages the lands and grooves. That can lead to accuracy problems. Going from a 30-06 to a .308 will result in considerable bullet jump. There can also be issues of feeding and ejecting cartridges. This link contains a summary of the Navy Conversion Experiment during the early 60s.

Personally I have never been a fan of the things.

Ron

 

[Havok7416]

My vote is for the .30-06 if only because both the rifles and ammo selection are more plentiful.

 

[USSR]

USSR: in fairness, I've got one but have not wanted to use it as I prefer .06 and didn't have much interest in playing with it unless needed in a ammo shortage pinch. Thanls for the insight. BTW - if you have time -why didn't it work do you think?

Don't know. Thought I just got a bad one, but when the second one didn't work...? Tried it in both my Garand and 03-A3, and couldn't get the bolt to close in either. I guess it's just one of those things that looks good on paper, but with both cartridge and chamber variances what they are...

Don

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Thanks for the reply and insight ~ happy new year!

 

[Reloadron]

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

.06 beats .308 in the M-1 AND lawfully, m2 .30/06 AP ammo is exempt by SPECIFIC ATF ruling but NOT .308. Minor in most places, but in some places (like my IL home) the .308 AP ain't legal - but .06 is. Plus , you can get .06 from the CMP at good prices and at days end, .06 is about 8-9 % more powerful. Plus, to me, the .06 recoil feels more elongated and softer. .
.308 is a fine caliber ~ the son of the .06. But here in the US, .06 is still 'king of the hill' in terms of number of cartridges produced for the civie market; so it makes sense in that regard too.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on a few things.

When the Navy conducted their experiments with chamber adapters or chamber sleeves during the early 1960s they came up as a big failure and I linked to the document concerning the test results and why these devices, using a technical term, just plain sucked.

One big problem with a chamber adapter in this particular case is free bore or bullet jump as the distance a bullet must travel before engaging the lands and grooves of the barrel. A 30-06 loaded with a 150 grain FMJBT has a Cartridge OAL of about 3.250". A .308 loaded with that same 150 grain FMJBT has a Cartridge OAL of about 2.775". That leaves a free bore or bullet jump increase of about 0.475" or .025" short of being 1/2". Considering most shooters of match type military rifles like the M1 Garand and M1A (M14) load for 0" free bore I don't see where almost 1/2" of free bore can be a good thing and has to cause accuracy to suffer. With hunting rifles a little free bore is a good thing but certainly not 1/2" of it. That being excessive even in a hunting rifle in my opinion.

As to .308 performance being compared to the 30-06 and the 30-06 winning hands down that is true but only to an extent as there is more to it.

Though frequently compared to it, the .308 cannot match the performance of the 30-06. The difference between the two, however, is insignificant unless bullets of 180 grains or heavier are discussed. The 30-06 greater cartridge capacity and ability to use slower powders give it an undeniable edge.

Taken from the .308 load data in the Sierra loading manual 50th anniversary edition.

I can't see any application where a shooter would be shooting bullets with a weight exceeding 180 grains in an M1 Garand or even a M1A for that matter. That being of my way of thinking, so there is no real performance difference between shooting a .308 or 30-06 cartridge in an M1 Garand with bullet weights below 180 grains and shooting bullet weights above 180 grains can be unhealthy for the rifle and the shooter.


Enter M1 Garand Adjustable Gas Nuts.

Made from hardened tool steel and parkerized. Service rifle legal! Has the same appearance and configuration as original; CMP 4th Edition #4-13-2-b.
By adjusting the volume of gas in the cylinder you change the speed of the op-rod and the harmonics of the barrel.
If you want to tame things down, it can be opened up just enough to function, or opened fully for single shot functionality.
If you are working on your own hand loads, a quarter turn WILL affect group size.
If you have a 308 Garand this is a necessity if you want to safely shoot heavier 168 grain match bullets.

A slick little device but I still don't see bullets with a weight exceeding 180 grains being fired in an M1 Garand so the .308 and 30-06 are still pretty much on par as to what they can get done in the rifle. Gas relief valves like the above are made by a few manufacturers and an overall good investment. They are also legal for CMP matches.

I agree that 30-06 ammunition is more prevalent in smaller retail outlets, but will it always be the 30-06 flavors you want to cycle in your M1 Garand?

Just My Take....
Ron

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

Uh, don't be so sure about that. Years ago I bought one of those inserts, and couldn't get it to work with several rifles I owned. I sent it back and got a replacement, and that one didn't work either.

The Navy used chamber inserts for a while -- cheaper than buying M14s. But they found that sometimes the chamber insert got extracted along with the fired case, resulting in an interesting event when the next shot was fired. I personally would avoid them in the M1 or any other semi-automatic weapon.

 

[Welding Rod]

30-06

Easier to find the bigger brass on the ground, and easier to handle during reloading.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Yeh, I'm with you guys on all of the above. I've never had any desire to experiment with the .308 insert. And no, I made the mistake (as a new Garand owner) of putting 180 grain through the M-1 and trashing a (probably marginal by then) gas system in 1992. 165 works fine. The difference between .06 and .308 is the stuff of gun nut hair splitting and we all know it. I started with .06 and the M-1 was a cheap substitutre (at the time) for the m1a I couldn't afford. twenty odd years on, I'm happy with my stable of 2 M-1's in .06 and other 'lesser' weapons that go bang. So I guess if someone had another weapon in .308 it would make sense to have the M-1 in that caliber so they could eat from the same trough.