Questions on loading for the Garand
- Thread starter .38 Special
- Start date
- Status
Boundary Value Problem:
(Just for fun w/ QL)
Were I to reload the 24" Garand with 4895/48gr/175SMK/49,000psiChamber
2,640fps/9,600psi@Port
Were I to optimize velocity for that same 49,000psiChamber using slower RL26:
2,830fps/12,000psi@Port
Bottom Line: Don't hot rod a Garand like you could a bolt action...
even at lower pressures.
.
(Just for fun w/ QL)
Were I to reload the 24" Garand with 4895/48gr/175SMK/49,000psiChamber
2,640fps/9,600psi@Port
Were I to optimize velocity for that same 49,000psiChamber using slower RL26:
2,830fps/12,000psi@Port
Bottom Line: Don't hot rod a Garand like you could a bolt action...
even at lower pressures.
.
Jeremy2171
Member
Cool opinion but not relevant...facts work no feelings.
Bullet weight isn't an issue.
I've said as much about the Powders. Muzzle velocity is not a restriction however.
Somewhat..but not exactly accurate.
Jeremy2171
Member
Nothing wrong with that at all.
I do note your chamber pressure is on the low side. What distance is the 2640fps calculated at?
Why are you using powders outside the recommended list? I mean you just proved my point about what to use and not to use.
Hotrod? I didn't suggest that at all...
Last edited:
I follow "Handloader" like Jermemy2171, but I also look at the Hornady powder manual for the M1 Garand and often refer back to "The Complete M-1 Garand by Jim Thompson."
The problem as I see it, is OP rod damage could be both too slow of powder and using "bad"
lubricants. CMP recommends "Lubriplate" grease, J. Thompson says use hi-temp bearing grease and for the past 7 years I been using EWG(extreme weapons grease). EWG says it's good from -100 degreesF to +750 degreesF. Problem: How do you know when your grease is going to fail while in the middle of a match? lol. "Do Ya Punk, did I shoot 5 or 6?" I can say the same for powder, why load to 49 grains of powder when 45.0 to 47.5 will work just fine even for hunting.
The picture shows 10 shots from my Danish Garand, 30.06 at 100 yards using a National Match peep. I shot two groups a month ago from an N-bloc and tried to let the barrel cool which caused two separate groups. While cooling off I top loaded 2 rounds(which some say can't be done). My gun likes to vertical string when it gets hot. Left group has 3 touching at 3/4 inch. Right group has 2 touching at 11/16 inch. The load was a Remington case trimmed to 2.483, 47 grains of IMR-4064, Win. LRP and 165 gr. Hornady Interlock SP flat base seated at 3.295. And I still think I can do better if I use JHP and it quits snowing here in Wis. I just can't see why anyone would force the pressure on a fine, old, good shooting rifle, when 2,600 fps will do just fine.
Last edited:
Jeremy2171
Member
Not about "forcing" pressure. It's more about clearing up years of myths associated with the garand and commercial ammo.
If commercial ammo is operating at the same pressures as milsurp ammo then it's not dangerous to use commercial ammo in a stock garand. Or to use regualr load data instead of watered down "garand" loads.
Thats the point.
OP
OP
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,355
Thank you for the link. Went ahead and ordered some of the FMJBTs. Looks like 44 or 45 grains of AA4064 should be a good starting - and maybe ending - load. I think I'm good to go!
Jeremy2171
Member
Pick up some varget and 168/175 match bullets when you get a chance. 48.0 of varget will make your rifle shoot tiny groups
Ironicaintit
Member
My experience has been that my Garand really likes IMR 4895 and 150-165 gr bullets.
It's happy, I'm happy...
It's happy, I'm happy...
Last edited:
The Gentle Readers might want to run some id the references and authors down as discussed in this article:
https://thegca.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Ammo-Part-3-article.pdf
https://thegca.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Ammo-Part-3-article.pdf
Jeremy2171
Member
yep..take note that zero evidence was presented in that article that commercial ammo was dangerous to the garand other than "we say so". They did provide an example of extreme long range ammo with slow powders in "handloads".
So the only comment of value in that article is that handloads with slow powders "can" be a problem.
Thankfully your own quickload data above proves my point quite well.
Quickload gives some decent numbers that comes close to real world numbers. So if you want to play around a little in it you will see when you have the potential for problems when handloading.
Commercial ammo doesn't produce port pressure in levels that are excessive to milsurp port pressures so thats another myth thats been debunked.
Did you note my question about your QL data?
Last edited:
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
Interesting debate - up to about post #3.
1KPerDay
Member
For any who want to see how fast commercial ammo speeds up bolt velocity. Whether it’s harmful is another issue.
Jeremy2171
Member
This is a prime example of people who don't know much about the garand making a video full of misinformation. Then making a catchy video that "proves" the gun show myth they've always heard. They did no research and used one of the weakest loadings of M2 ball out there to "prove" the myth is really true. Then people who know even less than about garands than these two using THIS video as "proof" to win an argument.
Now go into these two videos with an open mind.. over 70 different types of ammo tested and data compiled for anyone to see. Compared to one M2 ball data point and the weakest loading of all the years at that.
The part 2 video duplicates the inrange video you linked above then fully debunks it.
Commercial ammo operates at similar pressures as milsurp. Therefore there is no danger. However if you cherry pick the milsurp ammo you test then yes you can show that commercial ammo is "hotter" like in the video above or perhaps in garand gears testing...they came up with similar results but decided if they showed the facts no one would buy their unnecessary product. But thats money....and we know how people get about that.
OOC: What ballistic performance do you consider weak?
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6854999&postcount=27
Jeremy2171
Member
Not sure the purpose of the link in your post. It's not relevant to my comment.
If you watch the two videos the information you seek is in there.
Jeremy2171
Member
What does the spec for M2 ball say? That is the spec.
Again..not sure what your post has to do with my comment.
Jeremy2171
Member
Already answered it. Army spec for M2 ball
Wrong: Since you debated the M2 ball spec in Post#38, Give us your weight & velocity criteria.
Last I heard it was page 5-9
http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/MILITARY/united_states_army_tm_43-0001-27 - 29_april_1994.pdf
which is the same as duplicated in https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6854999&postcount=27
You have something different that you would say Post#38 was sandbagging?
.
Jeremy2171
Member
You must have a hard time reading...
I already stated the spec..the army spec.
Which is 2740fps +/- 30 @78ft.
Again still trying to figure out why you are arguing over an accepted specification?
Thank you
Why? Because you said Post#38 was weak.
Please elaborate on that one
Otherwise, the comparative accelerated/slamming action of higher velocity commercial loads (60ksi if you
believe SAAMI) in Post #38 ...does tend to catch the eye.
I do note with interest (again) that TM 43-0001-27 lists 50ksi for standard M2 ball.
(...or did the United States Army -- an official organ of the United Federal Gov't -- manage to muck up CUP?)
Then again, I again_again note with interest that https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6854999&postcount=27
does nail the Army weight/velocity/same powder spec -- right at 47,000 psi
'tis a puzzlement.....
Why? Because you said Post#38 was weak.
Please elaborate on that one
Otherwise, the comparative accelerated/slamming action of higher velocity commercial loads (60ksi if you
believe SAAMI) in Post #38 ...does tend to catch the eye.
I do note with interest (again) that TM 43-0001-27 lists 50ksi for standard M2 ball.
(...or did the United States Army -- an official organ of the United Federal Gov't -- manage to muck up CUP?)
Then again, I again_again note with interest that https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6854999&postcount=27
does nail the Army weight/velocity/same powder spec -- right at 47,000 psi
'tis a puzzlement.....
Last edited:
Jeremy2171
Member
Before we discuss any of this...Thank you
Why? Because you said Post#38 was weak.
Please elaborate on that one
Otherwise, the comparative accelerated/slamming action of higher velocity commercial loads (60ksi if you
believe SAAMI) in Post #38 ...does tend to catch the eye.
I do note with interest (again) that TM 43-0001-27 lists 50ksi for standard M2 ball.
(...or did the United States Army -- an official organ of the United Federal Gov't -- manage to muck up CUP?)
Then again, I again_again note with interest that https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6854999&postcount=27
does nail the Army weight/velocity/same powder spec -- right at 47,000 psi
'tis a puzzlement.....
Did you watch the two videos I linked?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked