7.62x51 Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have heard for years that the DI system in the AR contributes to accuracy being no operating rod. But Bart B cited the facts. why are bolts more accurate then most gas operated semis then?

Because BartB doesn't understand the facts. It's a pattern with him. Simply having the bullet pass over a hole in the barrel is detrimental to accuracy. Having the gas system be operational and thus gas flowing into that hole (in a very non-symmetrical manner - there's only a hole on one side) is worse. Thus you get the observed facts - bolts are more accurate than gas guns, and gas guns with the gas system closed off are more accurate than those with it operational. There's really not that much to it.
 
A lot of people think that the oprod cycling the action affects accuracy. This cannot be true because the oprod doesn't begin cycling until after the bullet leaves the muzzle. What the oprod does affect is barrel vibration
 
I have only actually seen one rifle literally blow up. It was at a match in W. Virginia my brother-in-law was shooting at. The rifle was a Chinese Poly Tech M14 version and best guess was an out of battery slamfire. The shooter was OK with injures to his face from fragmenting metal. I have never heard of or witnessed any ill results of shooting 7.62 X 51 in a .308 Winchester chamber or visa versa. Then too, I view the cartridges as the same and have never seen much difference in velocity when comparing the two in my bolt guns or gas guns.

Ron
 
Last edited:
Be interesting to see the line count for a major match and see how the M14/M1A is doing versus the AR 10 and 15 pattern guns.

Years ago I went from my Garand to the M1A because more and more M1A guns were showing up at the matches. Then at one match on a cold and rainy day I actually placed second. The rifle and shooter that beat me by a good margin was a AR-15 (Reduced targets at 200 yards). Needless to say I had to have one of those AR rifles. :) Actually I am not sure which rifles are taking home the matches anymore and I agree it would be interesting to see.

Ron
 
Catastrophic failures? Nope. Bent op rods? Yup, lots of them.

Bull. Winchester set the pressure spec for .308 off of measured military 7.62 ammo. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. If someone is bending op rods, there are only two posibilities: 1) The gun in question is not suitable for either round or 2) the ammo is over pressure (likely reloads).
 
Hmm... My HK 91 has shot tons of .308 ammo. Maybe I better check the op rod. :rofl:

I should have specified better - the thread has largely been about the M1a, so I didn't think to mention that.

Guys that spent much time around CMP and NRA HP SR matches have seen the difference in effect by full SAAMI vs. full CIP level loads on the M1a
 
Be interesting to see the line count for a major match and see how the M14/M1A is doing versus the AR 10 and 15 pattern guns.

In SR classes, AR-15's run the show, especially at reduced distance matches. AR-10's seem to be fairly rare, I know M110 clones are legal in NRA, but I'm not sure the AR-10 has ever been so in CMP. Usually there's still a showing by Garand and M1a shooters, but largely, it's an AR-15 game now. I wasn't at any of the matches to see them, but I've heard and seen match results when some of the military teams changed over to AR-10's and blew the M1a's off of the line - which is a fun baseline, since they're effectively the same shooters, coaches, armourers, ammo supply, etc, and of course, known to be top of the top for shooter ability AND arms race budget.

Especially after the rule changes in recent years, CMP/NRA-HP are going to be like any other sport - nothing but an "arms race" where super modified AR-15's will continue to take over the competition. Other than Military Match rules, it's basically anything goes for AR-15's now, 20" and less, no AGB, A1/A2 pistol grip... Even scopes up to 4x32mm, rumor has it expanding to include 6x next season (although not published/confirmed).

The day of the Garand and M1a match rifle is likely very near its end.
 
Commercial chambers are cut so they are safe with any version of the commercial 308 winchester and NATO rounds.
The only time I have seen potential issues are with some older chambers form M1A and M14 where the additional headspace was too
close to the acceptable limit. Some older firearms like a converted Spanish mauser might present this situation too. To the additional
tolerances we have to factor chamber stretching through heavy use. Normally the barrels will be shot and due for replacement anyway
but sometimes they are being sold as they are.
But otherwise they should be safe. Excessive head space and available free bore are easy to check even w/o SAAMI or field gauges.
 
Because BartB doesn't understand the facts. It's a pattern with him. Simply having the bullet pass over a hole in the barrel is detrimental to accuracy. Having the gas system be operational and thus gas flowing into that hole (in a very non-symmetrical manner - there's only a hole on one side) is worse. Thus you get the observed facts - bolts are more accurate than gas guns, and gas guns with the gas system closed off are more accurate than those with it operational. There's really not that much to it.
Hard to dispute what Bart B says the man has tons of experience just like Kraigwy.
 
Soon after I bought my M1A I called SAI tech support to ask about using commercial .308 win. The tech told me as long as the ammo fell within SAMMI specs, was not a youth or reduced recoil load and was not a soft tip bullet (i.e Core Lokt) it was safe to use
 
Well, they are already having Garand matches which I take as a sign of competitive obsolescence. Can the M14/M1A be far behind.

I'd tend to expect you're right with that expectation. There already exists "Vintage Rifle" matches too, so they'll have to come up with a new name, but I do expect the M1a's will get pushed to the rear echelon, I'd assume get lumped in with the Garands at least initially. I've seen "Battle Rifle" matches off of the record where this type could compete, so maybe that's the game for them in the future?

I'm also sad to say I think (especially as CMP supplies dry up, and with SA no longer producing Garands) there won't be many new shooters which are drawn to the allure of the Garand in the future. The guys who grew up watching WWII movies with a romanticized view of the Garand, and the guys who went through the transition to the M16 during the Vietnam era (and experienced all of its failings out of the gate) are aging out of the game and new shooters just aren't drawn to the Garands or M1a's like they used to be. The M1a retains some followers, since it's been kept moderately up to date due to its sustained, albeit limited, military application use, but I think the favor for Battle Rifles is dying off and the new generation is (ignorantly) happy with the M16/M4/AR-15.

However, I REALLY hope the CMP can continue to grow and deliver upon the DCM's mission - to ensure our nation is capable of defending itself through marksmanship training of the general citizenry. Hanging onto past battle rifles isn't applicable for that purpose - I recognize they need to grow with the times, especially considering the high volume of firearms ownership and high rate of purchase in new generations.
 
I have heard for years that the DI system in the AR contributes to accuracy being no operating rod. But Bart B cited the facts. why are bolts more accurate then most gas operated semis then?
Bart is correct, in what he posted

As to the question - have you seen the diameter of an M14 barrel?
 
Bull. Winchester set the pressure spec for .308 off of measured military 7.62 ammo. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. If someone is bending op rods, there are only two posibilities: 1) The gun in question is not suitable for either round or 2) the ammo is over pressure (likely reloads).

Actually, there is a difference.

Port pressure
.

The military had a limit to the maximum port pressure. SAAMI does not.

.308 Win loaded with heavy bullets tend to have higher port pressures that advisable.
 
Bart is correct, in what he posted

As to the question - have you seen the diameter of an M14 barrel?
yes it is the same diameter as the "pencil thin" mini 14 barrel which is a little thicker being it has a 22 hole drilled in it. I have a standard M1A standard with TRW parts and I get 1 1/2 at 100 yds with FMJ handloads and 2 I/2 inches at 200 yds with the now banned norinco steel cased FMJ with issue sights
 
Of course, bullets are a tiny bit unbalanced as they go past the gas port in semiautos. They’re also unbalanced a tiny bit if they enter the rifling crooked. If the gas pushing them out doesn’t do so evenly all the way around them as they leave, that tips and may also unbalance them a tiny bit. Does it matter?

Firearm accuracy is best (bullets land on target in the smallest area) when everything that moves does so repeatable from shot to shot. That includes the barrel, bullet and whatever’s holding the firearm. If they all move the same amount and in the same direction as the arm fires and the bullet goes through the barrel until it exits, their trajectories will be repeatable. They’ll all land in the same place; environmental variables remaining constant for each shot.

Dr. F W Mann proved over a century ago that bullets unbalanced the same way (small holes drilled in their sides) took a different path to the target than balanced ones. But if the unbalance point was at the same place at the muzzle when they all left, their trajectories would be repeatable. Same thing with bullets indexed in the chamber with their high runout point at the same clock number. Same with service rifle lands and grooves at their muzzles enlarged more at one point around the bore and groove surface by cleaning rods rubbing the metal away. Accuracy was the same as unbalanced bullets with no runout, but the group center would be a fraction or two of a MOA different for the same sight settings. M118 match ammo typically had bullet runout up to .006" and those shot test groups twice the size of ones with zero runout. Indexed to the same place in the chamber of Garands I tested them in, they shot as accurate as ammo with .001" or less bullet runout. (Runout setup was the round’s pressure ring and shoulder midpoint in a V block and dial indicator tip 1/10th inch back from bullet tip; this is the only way to get runout numbers equal to what they’ll be when the rounds are chambered.)

7.62 M118 match ammo’s best lots tested about 10 inches extreme spread at 600 yards fired from bolt action test barrels in a Mann rest. Same accuracy was attained by M1 and M14/M1A rebuilt rifles with standard profile or heavy barrels equal to the quality of the test barrel shooting the same lot. And their bolts are selected so there’s .001" or less head clearance on a 7.62 NATO chamber GO headspace gauge. Good lots of commercial match ammo as well as handloads have shot the same level of accuracy in bolt action match rifles as well as service semiauto ones. Rifles were tested from accuracy cradles which eliminates all the variables us humans have and how they effect both gas operated and bolt action rifles; explained in the next paragraphs.

Semiauto service rifles such as the M14 and M1 used in military, CMP and NRA competition for them can have top quality barrels (groove diameter’s smaller than bullet diameter), any dimension rear aperture and front sight width but virtual standard stock dimensions and a 4.5 pound trigger pull. There’s’ no difference in accuracy across different barrel weights of the same length. With their rear sight all the way up for long range, the shooter’s cheek weld on the stock comb is minimal; not too steady. A post front sight is hard to be repeatable in its alignment on a black bullseye. Such sighted rifles tend to shoot into the light when sunlight shines more on one side than the other and if the zero was attained in bright light but later shot in dim light, the rear sight requires a half or more MOA down and/or side adjustment. Their op rods have to go back into battery exactly the same place for every shot else they won’t vibrate the same for each round fired while the bullets’ are in the barrel; their muzzle axis relative to the line of sight won’t be repeatable. Barely tapping the op rod handle in any way changes it’s fit parameters to the metal parts it touches and that changes how the barrel whips and wiggles before the bullet exits. With their stocks’ same size and shape for people with different shapes and sizes makes them harder to shoot precisely compared to bolt action match rifles. It’s nigh impossible to shoulder and aim a semiauto service rifle held exactly the same for each shot so they’ll shoot to point of aim for each shot. Only new cases produced best accuracy in these semiautos; resized fired ones from these rifles have their heads too much out of square with the case axis causing the head impacting the bolt face off center which forces the barreled action to flex more in that axis; mostly at right angles to the bolt lug axis from center to 1 or 7 o’clock. Nobody I know of ever squared up an M1 or M14/M1A bolt face.

Bolt action match rifles’ stocks and their shape can be tailored to the shooter making very repeatable positioning to the human shooting them for each shot. Their light triggers of a pound or less means less aiming disturbance when the sear releases the firing pin or hammer when the trigger stops against its limit. And their shaded front aperture sight is light amount/angle indifferent as well as virtually equal in repeatable alignment on the bullseye as scope sights have; evidenced by any sight scores virtually equal to metallic sight scores in long range matches. Their square bolt faces and no more than .001" head clearance on a GO gauge means minimal changes to case heads being square for every shot. Even new cases shoot virtually the same level of accuracy as proper full length sized ones; both center bullets perfectly in the bore when the round fires.

I’ve shot the same lot of M118 match ammo in two different rebuilt M1's and three Win 70 factory barreled match rifles. Accuracy at 600 yards was the same for 30-shot test groups; about 12 inches. Lake City told me the acceptance tests for accuracy with that lot of ammo in their bolt action barrel was 2.5" mean radius (about 5" average spread for 10 shot groups, extreme spread’s about 5X mean radius). The following’s a 270-shot test group Lake City arsenal shot at 600 yards for their 1965 National Match lot of M119 ammo with a 1.9" mean radius; inner circle’s 6", outer is 12":

21921672136_155c25a375_o.jpg

All of Lake City’s 30 caliber match ammo (7.62 and .30-06) was loaded with bullets from 3 or 4 production lots; each lot from a different set of coin, cup, trim, core and shape dies. Each set of bullet making dies in the machine holding them made slightly different bullets. One machine and set of dies typically made more uniform bullets than the others and it’s bullets would shoot under MOA at 600 yards. The outliers in the above group come from the worst batch of bullets with the greatest runout in the lot of loaded ammo.
 
The AR-15 dominates, and with AR-10s being available to shoot the round why would people getting a new platform for such competition get an M14 clone.
AR-10s are easier and cheaper to maintain and easier to setup for accuracy. A free floated AR barrel is a lot easier than a perfectly bedded M14 clone to accomplish, and is simple and requires merely swapping some furniture if it doesn't come that way from the start.

That said I might be in the market for a new M1A sometime in the future. California just banned ARs, so if I want a semi auto I can travel with and use in the outdoors without 'assault weapon' restrictions I need something new.
If I have to live in the past, the M1A is a pretty good past.
 
Gas port pressure for the Garand's about 11,000 psi. For the M14/M1A, it's about 15,000 psi.

When the US Navy got their first Garand barrels chambered for the 7.62 round from Springfield Armory, MA in 1965, the gas ports were standard .079" which was spec for .30-06 ammo. They soon learned that with the lower pressure at the M1's gas port with 7.62 NATO rounds, pressure was not enough to reliably cycle the op rod and bolt, the port was drilled out to .110". All those broach rifled barrels were air gauged and those with groove diameters very uniform and less than .3079" were set aside as match barrels; the others were used in standard service grade 7.62 Garands for recruit training.

The USAF Rifle Team using these barrels in Garands rebuilt by the USN shop developed a long range load with 44 grains of IMR4320 in a primed M118 case then a Sierra 190 HPMK bullet seated to an OAL of 2.850". Probably the most accurate long range load for these rifles easily shooting MOA at 1000 yards with a good 1:12 twist standard service profile barrel. Bullets left about 2600 fps and both peak and port pressure were at maximum; perhaps a little more in some barrels. The other US military teams tried that load in their M14NM barrels but port pressure closer to the chamber in them was way too high for safety and reliability. Instead, the US Army and Marine Corps Teams often pulled bullets from M118 ammo and replaced them with a Sierra 180 HPMK; it shot MOA at 1000 in good barrels. The newer versioin of this bullet had the same boattail as the 168 HPMK and therefore its BC was lower. Such bullets too often went subsonic in cooler weather so the US Army Team contracted Sierra to retool their bullet machines with dies shaping 180's with the original boattail like their 190's and 200's have. Sierra's 175 grain HPMK's have that same boattail.

Standard M1 and M14 rifle barrels' profiles are stiffer than a lot of 30" long Palma rifle barrels that shoot under 2/3 MOA at 1000 yards with the best ammo. That's what thousand yard record setting benchrest rifles shoot. All barrels, regardless of profile or how stiff they are, whip and vibrate very repeatable from shot to shot. They're more repeatable in that regard than powder and primers are burning uniformly to produce muzzle velocity and pressure curves the same for every shot.
 
a million tons of experience

A million tons? I was not aware that experience was measured in tons? Yes, Bart brings considerable experience and knowledge to the forums but is not the only member who contributes a strong knowledge base to the forums. There are dozens of members just like Bart who contribute making THR a nice place. I believe Bart would share that view.

Ron
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top