Varget load for Garand?

[TheHappyGunner]

Hello again, guys,

I've done my homework, I've read my manuals, and still I have a question. Apparently, Varget has a similar burn rate to more common Garand powders like IMR 4064 and IMR 4895. I have tried both of these powders but decided to try some Varget.

The Hornady reloading manual is the only manual I have that includes M1 Garand specific data for Varget under 150 gr bullets. However this data is listed for commercial brass, while I am using Greek HXP.

So, with a Hornady max load of 46.2 gr Varget for the Garand (150 gr bullets), I loaded up 45 gr Varget in my surplus brass.

Is this an acceptable load? Using surplus .30-06 brass, where should my min-max loads be for Varget and 150 gr bullets? Thanks!

 

[USSR]

The Hornady reloading manual is the only manual I have that includes M1 Garand specific data for Varget under 150 gr bullets. However this data is listed for commercial brass, while I am using Greek HXP.

First, you do not have to reduce loads for .30-06 milsurp brass. Some of the commercial brands are heavier and have less case capacity than some milsurp brass. This is a case of guys thinking that because you must reduce charge weights when using 7.62x51 brass instead of commercial .308 brass, that the same must be true for .30-06; it is not.

Second, while the Hornady manual may have M1 Garand specific load data, it is clearly uber conservative. I regularly load 47.5gr to 48.0gr of IMR4895 in HXP brass with 150gr bullets, and Varget is a slower burn rate powder than IMR4895. While there is nothing wrong with your load, please note that 46.2gr of Varget is a mild load and nowhere's near a max load in an M1 Garand.

Don

 

[TheHappyGunner]

Thank you for clearing that up, Don. Any experience with Varget in your Garand?

 

[Rico567]

The Garand load I've got on the shelves is 50.0 gr. Varget, a bulk Winchester 150 gr. FMJBT, and a CCI #34 primer. Lots of military brass, some commercial. Very nice in the Garand, and accurate. I've also loaded Varget in .223, .30-30, and .308, and it's very versatile.

 

[Laphroaig]

HG,

Yeah, that load sounds light but if it is accurate, go for it.

To me, the holy grail of Garand ammo is the Hornady Garand ammo. Forensics consisting of pulling rounds to weigh and examine powder grains under a magnifying glass, as well as discussions with Hornady reps, indicate that load is 46.5 grs, Varget under a 168 Amax.

I duplicate that load with both Hornady and Sierra 168 match bullets with similar results.

Laphroaig

 

[sustratiotes]

I recently tried Varget in my Garand and am interested in any related experiences from others. (usual cautions, disclaimers, and referral to published sources before trying any of these)

I used RP brass I purchased as 'once fired', Win LR primer, and Hornady 150 BT. I started at 44.0 gr of Varget and moved up in .3 increments. The 44.0 gr loads were ejecting successfully, but I wouldn't want to go much lower for a reliable load in all weather/conditions. The first changes in the primers weren't extreme with any cratering, piercing, etc, but just starting to get flat around the edge of the primer, so I stopped increasing the charge. Besides, the groups were getting larger as I added more powder. The best group was near the bottom of the range at 44.9 gr. (just another data point - YMMV in your Garand)

One thing I focused on during the case prep was using a primer pocket uniformer to ream the primer pocket depth. I've heard that a high primer can cause problems in the Garand, so wanted to be sure I could get them all seated deep enough.

Any additional considerations when reloading for a Garand?

 

[USSR]

One thing I focused on during the case prep was using a primer pocket uniformer to ream the primer pocket depth.

+1. Always, always use a primer pocket uniformer on brass intended for use in a Garand. While there is no need to crimp, make sure you have sufficient neck tension.

Don

 

[Rico567]

I inspect the primers, once seated, to ensure the proper depth. Also, my use of the CCI #34 military-type primer is intended to obviate this issue.
The use of a crimp might be mentioned, although this is a basic requirement in semiautomatic firearms. I use the Lee FCD.

 

[beefyz]

Its good you started with the manuals. If you check in over at the CMP site, Reloading blog, you will see virtually everything you wanted to learn about re-loading for a Garand right there. I find it interesting to see what our peers are shooting and reloading at, but remember always what works in one guys M1 , may not work in yours/ whats safe in one M1, may not be safe in another. Having said that, like you, I started with the manuals, supplemented that with experience, and then noticed where my peers were in relation to my reloads. I have seen it discussed, written, and reloaded at many times over there that Varget @ 46 just about dups the M1 Ball(168) load and @ 47 just about dups the M2 Ball (150) load. Coincidently, thats just about where I am too.
Start as per manuals, work your way up looking for signs of problems, and see where you find your sweet spot. Have some fun.

 

[TheHappyGunner]

Thanks beefyz.

I've decided to try 45, 45.5, 46, and 46.5 gr Varget in HXP brass with Winchester primers. 46.5 gr exceeds max in the Hornady manual, but I've read that their manual is very conservative. Do any of these loads seem problematic with 150 gr bullets? My Garand is in exceptional mechanical shape.

 

[TenDriver]

I don't want to hijack this thread, but can anyone with Garand specific data throw me the maximum recommended load for IMR-4064 and a M2 bullet (150 gr)? I know I'm nowhere near it at 46 gr, but I'd like to work up a little I think. Also curious if anyone DOESN'T crimp for their M1 besides me...

 

[beefyz]

No one is going to tell you to excede maximum published data.You should continue reading & learning on shooting/reloading for this fine 'ole gal. Again, I suggest the CMP forums; not that anything is wrong on this site, its just the CMP is more Garand specific.
Its not just throwing grainages of powder, a chrono helps you pinpoint where you have to be. Your range laddering up should put you close to where you want to be. Again pay particular attention to the specifics, proper sizing of case, primer seating depth, pressure signs, etc

 

[beefyz]

Yes, when it blows up, you've reached maximum load in your gun. Why would you want the maximum load ? Your M1 doesn't need to be near a "maximum" to be accurate or functionable. When it was being tested, Johc C. himself loaded it up to unbelievable figures just to prove to the military how strong it was. Its the gas system, the op rod specifically, that you are more apt to damage by improper reloading via high charges or improper burn rates of powder.
IMR 4064 , even in the present crunch of components, is still one of the easiest powders to find. Some will state that along with the 4895s, it is one of the three best powders to use in the M1. Now, the problem, at least for me, and maybe why you ask the question because its what you have found. I have seen no consistent data for imr 4064 w/150s in the M1. I enjoy reading all our peers over there on the CMP forums stating all sorts of success with data thats all over the place. Hornady #7(?) did not test 4064 w/150s; did #8? . Handloader 8/10 tested it at 48gr with consistent 4/1/2-5 1/2" grps. Load data publishes 47-48 gr loads with success, Clark went as high as 49-50 grs. Many of our peers report success in the 46-48 gr range as do I. Again, numbers, useless without a chrono. Point being my friend, that without that chrono , you really don't know where you are. And as always, you just don't trust anyone elses numbers, you have to find that sweet spot in your M1 yourself.
As for crimp, answer above is good, not needed, if you have sufficient neck tension. A crimp does not solve insufficient neck tension. I've tested loads with/wo a crimp and it didn't seem to make a difference if thats what you were inferring. Good luck.

 

[I Corps 1970]

Loading a Garand too light can be more harmful than loading to the original velocity levels with IMR 4895-4064 or H. Varget. Lower pressure peaks can modify the effective burn rate and carry higher pressure farther down the barrel than loads that are in the ideal operating range.
I pulled a number of mid WW-II AP loads and the bullets weighted 163 gr +- and the powder charge was 52-53 gr of 4895 (this was the powder of the time). The pulled powder reloaded with modern cases, primers and 168 gr match bullets was 120-150 fps slower than new IMR 4895. With the old Chlorate primers this powder may have produced more velocity since this stuff was pretty hot from my readings. I would run somewhere in 47-49 gr 4064 with 150-155 gr bullets. My HRA likes 49.5 with 155 gr Sierra Palma. I use 47.1 gr of Varget with 168 A-Max. But start a little low and shoot three shot strings with .5 gr increases till you find a sweet sport. Note that rebarreled Garands may have shorter chambers than the issue chamber and care must be taken. The issue Garand barrels usually require hunting bullets with cannelures to be seated out a little past the cannelure to approximate issue ammo OAL and shoot best though hunting bullets are not usually "jump" sensitive.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I'm not telling anyobe to load what I load, I'm only reporting what I do.

Duplicating the original M1 load can be done with a 150gr Spitzer bullet over 47.5gr IMR4895. Charges if 49.0gr IMR4895 will do no harm. I choose to load 46.5gr H4895 under the same bullet.

If I were to use Varget I would charge 48.0/48.5gr under a 150gr bullet and would use the same charge of IMR4064. You can go as high as 50.0gr of either without a problem.

 

[W.E.G.]

I've used 45.5 grains VARGET with a 150 SMK, with the objective of having a mild load to shoot at 200 yards.

It works great in my rifle.

 

[W.E.G.]

50 grains varget with a 150 will get you to M2 ball velocities.

 

[W.E.G.]

Hodgdon wants you to stop at 49.5

 

[W.E.G.]

Notice the PSI differences in Quickload vs. Hodgdon data sources.

 

[W.E.G.]

In my opinion Varget is a bit slow-burning for the Garand.

Slower powders are going to give you greater gas-port pressures, so if you are hot-rodding the load, you are going to beat up your op-rod more with a slower powder (like Varget).

Or so the chatter on the interwebz goes.

 

[W.E.G.]

My rifle likes to flatten primers before it gets near the high end of the Hodgdon or the Quickload data.

So, my advice is start low, and watch the radius of the primer in your spent cases.

Unless you can really justify flattening primers, for velocity sake, I say load them light for the Garand.

Most of the shooting most of us do with the Garand is done at 200 yards or less. Why beat up the rifle, and inflict all that recoil on the shooter. Even the "light" loads in that matchstick Garand pack a pretty good recoil wallop. Shoot 88 rounds "full power" 30-06 ammo in a rack-grade Garand, and tell me you don't have a recoil hangover. If you are a teeth-gritter when you shoot that stuff, you might be signing up for some dental work too - especially if your mouth is already full of expensive dental work. And I'm not just making that up. Think about it.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I agree, Varget us on the slow side for M1 ammo. There really isn't a reason to use it since there are more suitable powders which are just as accurate and more available.

 

[Khornet]

Hodgdon wants you to stop at 49.5

Far as I can see, the Hornady manual loads are meant for targets and so don't develop unneeded power. That said, the "Sweet spot" for accuracy in M1 is said to be around 2600 fps....right at the starting load above. Chronographing my most accurate loads shows them all at 2580-2680 fps for 150 gr bullets.

 

[Bart B.]

Back in the day of Garands shooting .30-06 ammo in matches, a favorite long range load was 48 grains of IMR4320 under Sierra 180 or 190 grain match bullets. Yes, a stout maximum load but no different than the 7.62 Garands shooting 44 grains of IMR4320 under Sierra 190's that was also a favorite.

I've no idea where the "2600" fps number came from was earlier mentioned best for .30-06 Garand accuracy. M72 match ammo in Garands shot 172-gr. FMJBT match bullets out about 2700 fps; arsenal match ammo was chronographed 26 yards down range at 2640 fps. Pulling that bullet then putting a Sierra 180 in it that shot out at about the same speed was even more accurate typically shooting test groups half the size of what M72 match ammo did. Sierra 168's leaving at 2750 fps and Sierra 150 grain match bullets leaving at 2800 to 2900 fps were also tack drivers and favorites at up to 600 yards.

I and others have shot Garands 110 rounds a day in five 20-shot matches. Includes 2 sighters each match, three were slow fire and two were rapid fire. Nobody whimpered about recoil, including the ladies who sometimes won.

 

[Khornet]

Back in the day of Garands shooting .30-06 ammo in matches, a favorite long range load was 48 grains of IMR4320 under Sierra 180 or 190 grain match bullets. Yes, a stout maximum load but no different than the 7.62 Garands shooting 44 grains of IMR4320 under Sierra 190's that was also a favorite.

I've no idea where the "2600" fps number came from was earlier mentioned best for .30-06 Garand accuracy. M72 match ammo in Garands shot 172-gr. FMJBT match bullets out about 2700 fps; arsenal match ammo was chronographed 26 yards down range at 2640 fps. Pulling that bullet then putting a Sierra 180 in it that shot out at about the same speed was even more accurate typically shooting test groups half the size of what M72 match ammo did. Sierra 168's leaving at 2750 fps and Sierra 150 grain match bullets leaving at 2800 to 2900 fps were also tack drivers and favorites at up to 600 yards.

I and others have shot Garands 110 rounds a day in five 20-shot matches. Includes 2 sighters each match, three were slow fire and two were rapid fire. Nobody whimpered about recoil, including the ladies who sometimes won.

The "2600 number" comes from the box of M72 match ammo marked "velocity 2642"