Quantcast

M1 COAL

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by D.B. Cooper, Feb 14, 2020.

  1. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    So...

    Using this data: http://www.bearblain.com/Service Rifle Loadings.html which is supposedly from Hornady's M1 Garand specific pages, I have loaded a dummy cartridge on once fired brass, and it looks completely wrong.

    I have loaded a 168 grn tipped Sierra Match King to 3.240."

    @Slamfire earlier suggested a maximum COAL of 3.300 for Garands.

    The projectile is seated so deeply, that I estimate the base of the projectile to be about level with where the case starts to narrow to the neck (shoulder of the case). The cartridge appears to be way too short. The projectile protrudes from the mouth of the case well up past the ogive.
     
  2. Random 8

    Random 8 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Central MN
    You have a tipped SMK. This bullet is longer overall than the 168BTHP by Sierra or any other maker. Interestingly, Hornady 10th also lists the ELD 168 and Amax at 3.240". You'd have to reference your bullet length with one of the Hornady samples to see where they line up. You may need a longer COL with those Tipped SMKs, or they may not be suitable for the M1 at all.

    Just looked at the specs, and the G1 of the tipped SMK is significantly higher than the Hornady 168 BTHP, Amax or ELDM. Looking at the scale drawings, the 3 Hornady bullets share a similar profile and length. The two tipped examples are slightly longer overall, but not radically as in the case of the Sierras. I'm guessing you'll either be stuck with deep seating, or single load only with this bullet in the M1.

    Can you put up a picture of one of your 'funny looking' rounds?
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2020
  3. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    I'm already thinking that, too.

    Single loading is fine. I'm loading these for the 600 yard slow fire prone, which is fired by loading one round at a time, no clip.
     
    Random 8 likes this.
  4. mrawesome22-250

    mrawesome22-250 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    250
  5. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    So, interesting enough...

    Thinking about a suggested 3.300 max COAL for a Garand...

    I measured some mil supr 1980s Korean ammo I have..., they all came in around 3.328 - 3.330. I've fired hundreds of rounds of that stuff without an issue.

    I'm tempted to put a loaded mil surp round in the die, turn it down until it stops, and start loading ammo.
     
  6. Random 8

    Random 8 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Central MN
    Probably not a bad baseline, but it would be prudent to find your leade and make sure you're not wedging the ogive of one of those TSMKs into the lands. Work up with good practices, be safe. This is what I did to find my COL for the fussy K-31 which is notorious for a short leade. I found my "happy place" with a very slight jump to the rifling about 1/2 turn deeper than GP-11 dead stop with my particular bullet and dies.
     
    1KPerDay and D.B. Cooper like this.
  7. Slamfire

    Slamfire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,287
    Location:
    Alabama
    I am of the opinion there are two limiters on OAL for Garands. Firstly, magazine length. If the round is too long for the magazine, when attached to the clip, then the round is too long. This should be obvious, but it ought to be stated. This is the internet you know. Then, if the bullet jams in the throat, then the OAL is too long. Military chambers are generous in width and in the throat. I have gauged absolutely new, from the Arsenal rebuilds and SA, and the shortest throat gaged a 1.5. Many rack Garands that look new have barrels that gauge 3.5. However it is possible with an aftermarket match barrel that the throat is shorter. With Barnett match barrels on my match Garands, an OAL of less than or equal 3.30" worked fine with 168 SMK and 175 SMK's. However, I have and have had, absolutely no problems with 150 grain blasting ammunition that was around 3.250".

    If you load to Garand appropriate pressure levels, which is primarily limited by the gas system, pushing the bullet in won't cause any real pressure issues. The loads I used, which were 47.0 grains IMR 4895 with a 168, pressures should have been in the lower 40,000 to 45,000 psia range, which is just great. If you can do the job at lower pressures, you will have less problems with component changes.

    In terms of pressures, more means more problems.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
    cfullgraf likes this.
  8. Random 8

    Random 8 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2018
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Central MN
    Just did a little experiment. HXP 1980 military ball was around 3.290" COL when I averaged 3 samples. My handload of H168BTHP in the same brass was 3.270". Inserting both rounds into the top of the ram stroke in my Redding seating die, the dead stop of the HXP was about 1/4 turn of the seating spindle deeper than my 168BTHP load which is well proven to be accurate.
     
    D.B. Cooper likes this.
  9. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    Yep. So I just loaded up two dummy cartridges at 3.298, one each 150 grn fmj and 168 grn TSMK. Painted both with black sharpie and loaded them in the chamber. Let the bolt slam down from locked open on both. Repeated 3-4 times each. Not a mark on either of them. Both projectiles look proportionate to overall length. The 150 fmj cannelure is just barely below the mouth of the case. The 168 TSMK body is visible, and the ogive is above the case. (No cannelure on that projectile.)

    I'm going to run it right there and see what I get.
     
    1KPerDay and Random 8 like this.
  10. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    Sounds like you and I were doing nearly the same thing at the same time. LOL.

    Thanks for checking my work.
     
    Charlie98 and Random 8 like this.
  11. Laphroaig

    Laphroaig Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,413
    Location:
    W. PA
    FWIW factory Hornady Garand Ammo (168AMax) measures 3.290. Are the profiles of the AMax and tipped Matchking similar?
     
  12. Reloadron
    • Contributing Member

    Reloadron Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    7,726
    Location:
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    The data on that web page is taken from the Hornady 9th Edition. The data is for 168 grain bullets applies to the Hornady 168 grain A-Max #30502 and the 168 grain BTHP #30501 and both are loaded to a C.O.L. of 3.240". When I load Sierra Match King 168 grain BTHP #2200 I load them to a C.O.L. of 3.340" so we need to consider that all 168 grain .308 DIA bullets are not created equal. Use the data suggested by the guys making the bullets. Speer Gold Metal Match 168 grain BTHP # 2040 is loaded to a C.O.L. of 3.295" so different bullets different C.O.L.

    Ron
     
    Laphroaig and Slamfire like this.
  13. Charlie98

    Charlie98 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1,881
    Location:
    McKinney, TX
    Oddly enough, that is my standard M1 load for the 150grn bullet, although I know it's a little slow. No sense beating the action and oprod to death to poke holes in paper. I've considered mashing in some 168grn SMKs, just to see how the old girl does with them... that looks like a good load to try after an appropriate workup.
     
    Slamfire likes this.
  14. Laphroaig

    Laphroaig Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,413
    Location:
    W. PA
    I can't dispute what you are saying, but am curious why Hornady would suggest the same COL for the AMax and the BTHP which are two very different bullets. And then manufacture ammunition to sell to the public at a 3.290 COL. I've always considered manual COL's for rifle cartridges to be suggestions and adjust to fit my needs. I've been using 3.300 for 168 match bullets in my Garands.
     
    D.B. Cooper likes this.
  15. Reloadron
    • Contributing Member

    Reloadron Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    7,726
    Location:
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    You and I both. I see everything in a reloading manual as a good place to start. Now with that in mind when I have a question like yours, the A-Max verse BTHP 168 grain bullets which is a good question I call or email the guys making the stuff, be it bullets, primers, brass and just about anything else. I like email because when they reply I have something to save for future reference.

    In another example the same Hornady 9th under their M1 Garand load data for 150 & 155 grain bullets (150 grain FMJBT) and (155 grain A-Max) while they share the same load data as to powder charge and primer they do list two C.O.L. dimensions. The 150 grain FMJ BT @ 3.185 and the latter 155 grain A-Max comes along @ 3.240 and just in the images the differences are clearly apparent.

    Again, when I have a question like yours I take it to the manufacturer simply because I would not want to pass along bad dope. With the 168 flavors from Hornady I don't have any laying here I do have a box of their 150 grain FMJ BT #3037 which unlike the 155 grain A-Max do have a canalure groove. Beyond that beats me. :)

    Hornady Cust Service: 1 (800) 338-3220

    3625 West Old Potash Hwy
    Grand Island, NE 68803 USA
    Phone: 1-800-338-3220
    Phone: 1-308-382-1390
    Fax: 1-308-382-5761

    Business Hours
    Monday - Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Central
    Friday 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Central

    Ron
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
  16. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    Well, I ended up with a finished product of 3.270-3.28 OAL.

    Want to hear something funny? I remembered I have a copy of TM43-00001(Army Ammunitions Data Sheets). It lists COAL for M2 Ball as 3.340" and a powder charge of IMR 4895 of 50 grains. (MV 2740) That's well beyond any other published data I've seen.
     
  17. Reloadron
    • Contributing Member

    Reloadron Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    7,726
    Location:
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    *TM 43-0001-27 page 5-9.

    Propellant: Type ............................................ IMR 4895
    Weight......................................... 50 gr

    Well then I say damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead. Then too M2 Ball is a 150 grain bullet and I thought we were talking about 168 grain bullets? That's OK, that very same document list the exact same charge for M72 .30 Match which uses a 173 grain bullet so it exceeds the M2 Ball in weight by 23 grains. M2 Ball is 3.34 inches and M72 Match is 3.34 inches. Using that data what could possibly go wrong? I wouldn't let published data from the guys making the bullets get in my way.

    Ron
     
  18. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    I detect a certain amount sarcasm there. =)

    The point I was trying to make, is that a 3.34 OAL is going to be safe to fire. So, while, yes, we are discussing a 168 grn projectile, that same 3.34 OAL is still going to be safe. It may or may not be the most accurate, but it's going to work in the rifle. I set mine to just under the 3.30 that slamfire suggested.

    My mentioning of the powder charge was just superfluous. However, I stopped just short of Master Po's 47 grn maximum.
     
  19. Reloadron
    • Contributing Member

    Reloadron Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    7,726
    Location:
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    I wouldn't worry about that C.O.L. While I doubt I would put 50 grains of IMR4895 under a 168 grain match grain bullet I see the manual(s) as a good reference, I adjust my primers, powder charge and bullet seating depth accordingly. I also keep my C.O.L. to where the rounds fit and function. There really isn't much more to it. Develop what works for you within reasonable and safe limits. Hatcher's notes showed some interesting test loads developed for the M1 Garand most of us would never even consider. Then too if Hatcher blew up an M1 Garand he just went to the armory and got another, :)

    Ron
     
    Laphroaig likes this.
  20. Laphroaig

    Laphroaig Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,413
    Location:
    W. PA
    I have a copy of a March 1986 American Rifleman article in my stash of reference material entitled "Reloading for the M1 Rifle" by John R. Clarke. He lists loads from 150 to 200 gr. all at 3.340" COL. 200 Grains! Good grief!

    He does list a 50 gr. IMR4895 load with Federal brass at 2866 fps. Double good grief!!
     
  21. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    I wouldn't do that today, but back before the internet and the easy availability of information...
     
  22. Slamfire

    Slamfire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,287
    Location:
    Alabama
    Technical Manuals are not reloading manuals. That 50 grains happened to be the load for the day, with a lot of IMR 4895 that you will never, ever, buy off a store shelf. I don't know how many times this needs to be stated, but the powders you buy, on the shelf of a store, have been blended to meet a standard pressure curve by weight. To achieve that, powder sellers blend fast and slow lots of powder. Powder manufacturer is too imprecise to have a consistent product rolling off the end of the production line.

    In fact, getting on my soap box, consumers are absolutely unaware of the amount of blending that goes on for their food and drink products. Even single malt Scotch is blended, your wines, drinks, mustard, honey, olive oil, ketchup, chocolate, etc, are all blended to a consistent taste and texture. People are so removed from the farm that they think every mustard plant produces the same mustard intensity. Nope! (try Kampot pepper, the stuff has a flavor not found anywhere else) Just take the number of products you know are not blended, and divide them by the number of products that are blended, and see if the result comes out close to zero!

    Also, the velocity quoted in those TM's are based on a Frankford Arsenal pressure barrel, not a Garand barrel. I learned that from a lot acceptance sheet for WC852. The buying agent from the Government took a calibrated cartridge from Frankford Arsenal and using that, adjusted the pressure and velocities reading from the vendor's pressure barrel. You want malfunctions in your Garand, you stick 50 grains of IMR 4895 in the case, and try to push a bullet to 2750 fps. You are better off keeping 150 grain velocities between 2650 fps and 2700 fps, with lower being better. Faster is never, ever better in a Garand.

    You want to crack the rear heel of your Garand, just load them hot baby!

    s7M56fl.jpg

    3mjwJkm.jpg

    The owner of that receiver said that it cracked with HXP Greek 30-06. Some of that Greek ammunition was pretty old and had pressure spikes.

    this was a receiver on Gunbroker, either hot loads, or a slamfire did this

    kPwk8yv.jpg

    cK8FlTW.jpg

    vWjCRyf.jpg

    ncGc9Bs.jpg


    The Government had pressure barrels and chronographs at their reloading plants. I met at guy whose job at Badger Arsenal was adjusting the charge weights for cartridge reloading. The Government bought powder in 90,000 pound lots, and during the Vietnam war, they had train loads of 90,000 lb powder lots at the loading dock, and each lot had to be velocity and pressure tested because each lot was different. The Government did not have to pay extra for the powder manufacturer to blend the powders they received, with their acceptance criteria (the Government did not accept every lot of IMR 4895, some were too slow or too fast) the Government took the lots they received and figured out just how much powder produced how much pressure and gave how much velocity.
     
  23. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,014
    Location:
    Alaska
    Like I said, I made my comment as superflous (extra) information, not as a statement I was going to load 50 grains of powder into cases. In fact, my main purposes for referencing that manual was to compare cartidge lengths, in large part because I was having difficulty reconciling the very short lengths stated in Hornady's compared to the milsurp ammo I've been shooting for a while now.
     
    Slamfire likes this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice