170 gr Jacketed FP bullets in Garand and/or M1A?

[Jeremy2171]

You are the only one I have seen state this. The experts disagree with you. And to be clear, I am not an expert, so maybe you are correct, but everything reliable I have read states the opposite of what you are saying,

Maybe the "experts" aren't really experts and just repeating what they've been told.

Jim Thompson pointed this out years ago in his garand book.

If commercial ammo has similar port pressure as milsurp ammo.... what's the issue?

 

[Jeremy2171]

Do you even reload?

Yep..... many decades worth of it. Why?

 

[Chief TC]

Maybe the "experts" aren't really experts and just repeating what they've been told.

Jim Thompson pointed this out years ago in his garand book.

If commercial ammo has similar port pressure as milsurp ammo.... what's the issue?

Jim Thompson may be correct, but he is definitely in the smaller camp on this issue. Other Garand authors and "experts" don't agree. The common line of thinking is certain bullets and powders can ruin the op rod. I'll be intrested to see if Slamfire weighs in on this thread.

 

[Jeremy2171]

Jim Thompson may be correct, but he is definitely in the smaller camp on this issue. Other Garand authors and "experts" don't agree. The common line of thinking is certain bullets and powders can ruin the op rod. I'll be intrested to see if Slamfire weighs in on this thread.

Not worried about slamfire...he's often wrong on this topic as well.

Still waiting on someone to show us SAAMI spec commercial ammo that's really dangerous to the garand.

Jim actually did a real test to prove a point and wrecked an oprod.... shooting the gun bone dry with heavy loads and slow powder.

Of course this was after firing hundreds of rounds of the same ammo in a properly greased rifle with zero issues...

 

[GooseGestapo]

As to the OP’s original question, the flat nose bullets will shoot fine through the M1 Garand. You may find that seating the bullets out to 3.150” OAL will provide smoother function. I’ve loaded flat nose cast bullets in my Garands with no problems.

As to BLC2 powder, it does splendid in the Garand.
However, I wouldn’t load it up to current maximum loads in deference to your 70+yr old keepsake.

Hodgdons lists BLC2 in there .30/06 Service gun data as using a Max load of 48.5gr for 2,662fps which closely duplicates the original M1 Ball round and later National Match Ammunition.

https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-data-center

(Yes, I know it used a 173-174gr bullet).
My personal load using BLC2 is 48.0gr. I use the Speer 168gr BTHP bullet. It costs about half what Sierra wants for the Match K8ngs. Shoots almost as good!

I won’t use any powder slower than IMR4320, or bullets heavier than 175gr in the Garands. I also clean and lube regularly.

I’ve got a load for my bolt action ‘06’s that’s INSANE! It’s a 165gr either Sierra GameKing or Nosler BT that gets 3,000fps from a 24”bbl and 3,100fps from a 26” bbl P17. It’s also insanely accurate! It uses Reloader17. I won’t let it near my Garands…

 

[Charlie98]

It costs about half what Sierra wants for the Match K8ngs. Shoots almost as good!

I find that almost all of the mainstream 168grn BTHP's shoot almost as good as the SMK... even the Nosler CC seconds that show up for cheap now and then. But I have to admit, when it comes time to get serious, I reach for the Sierras.

 

[Chief TC]

Not worried about slamfire...he's often wrong on this topic as well.

Still waiting on someone to show us SAAMI spec commercial ammo that's really dangerous to the garand.

Jim actually did a real test to prove a point and wrecked an oprod.... shooting the gun bone dry with heavy loads and slow powder.

Of course this was after firing hundreds of rounds of the same ammo in a properly greased rifle with zero issues...

Interesting, always seems to be different camps on firearm experiences and how to proceed. As for me, I just focus on developing the best load for my M1 Garand. Getting good results with Varget and 4064 with 168 HPBTs but still a ways to go to determine best load.

 

[Jeremy2171]

Interesting, always seems to be different camps on firearm experiences and how to proceed. As for me, I just focus on developing the best load for my M1 Garand. Getting good results with Varget and 4064 with 168 HPBTs but still a ways to go to determine best load.

48.0 varget and 168/175s shoot lights out.

 

[Chief TC]

48.0 varget and 168/175s shoot lights out.

Thanks. I haven't worked up to 48 yet but will definitely do so. Mine shoots great but it will never be an exceptional shooter. The last 1/8 inch of the muzzle has full erosion. Best group at 100 was 1.75 inches. I am surprised it can even do what it does. But always functions great and very reliable for our military rifle matches out to 500.

 

[hps1]

Interesting, always seems to be different camps on firearm experiences and how to proceed. As for me, I just focus on developing the best load for my M1 Garand. Getting good results with Varget and 4064 with 168 HPBTs but still a ways to go to determine best load.

47 gr H4895 behind 168 gr SMK's was the gold standard used to duplicate GI M72 Match ammo back in the day. In the 7.62 NATO Garand, 41.5 gr H4895 w/168 gr SMK on a 600 yd. reduced to 100 yd approved target:

Guess which shot was the 20th!

Point is, why go against conventional wisdom to push the Garand beyond the long established safe loads and take a chance of damaging your rifle(s)?

Regards,
hps

​

 

[Jeremy2171]

47 gr H4895 behind 168 gr SMK's was the gold standard used to duplicate GI M72 Match ammo back in the day. In the 7.62 NATO Garand, 41.5 gr H4895 w/168 gr SMK on a 600 yd. reduced to 100 yd approved target:
View attachment 1175864
Guess which shot was the 20th!

Point is, why go against conventional wisdom to push the Garand beyond the long established safe loads and take a chance of damaging your rifle(s)?

Regards,
hps

​

Nothing posted here is dangerous to garands.

People are like they are fragile or something.

 

[hps1]

I find that almost all of the mainstream 168grn BTHP's shoot almost as good as the SMK... even the Nosler CC seconds that show up for cheap now and then. But I have to admit, when it comes time to get serious, I reach for the Sierras.

I shot SMK's exclusively in competition, but there is nothing wrong with Nosler "seconds". Nosler 2nds are all I use nowadays. I've never actually found any blemishes or other issues and all that I've used have performed exceptionally well in the accuracy department.

As an example, around 1996 or so my eyes had deteriorated to the point I could no longer see iron sights, and regrettably had to retire the Garand. After a dozen years or so, began to consider mounting an optic (no small feat at the time but Hopco base is now available) on mine. Figured out a no-drill base which replaced the rear sight and started the search for an optic. Hopco Rear Scope Mount

First optic was a simple red dot with no magnification...an improvement, but not what I wanted. Third step, a Primary Arms 3x32mm optic. While spoiling the girlish figure of my rifle, it brought the Garand out of retirement. It also proved just how accurate a good M1 can be.

I'll admit I was concerned about port pressure, but figured with the lighter bullet H4895 & good lubrication it would be safe, especially w/the limited number of rounds I would fire using the rifle only for predator hunting.

This target is with Nosler Ballistic Tip "seconds". I suspect that most of their so called seconds are overruns rather than blems as I've shot a lot of them over the years & never found a defect.

Nothing posted here is dangerous to garands.
People are like they are fragile or something.

There are obviously many safe loads out there for the Garands, which are not necessarily "fragile", but due to the fact that some Garands have now seen their 87th birthday, & deserve to be fed accordingly while remembering metallurgy has come a long ways in those 87 years. Heck, I just celebrated my own 87th birthday and find that my own diet requiring a bit more care. Darn sure miss those jalepenos!

 

[Charlie98]

47 gr H4895 behind 168 gr SMK's was the gold standard used to duplicate GI M72 Match ammo back in the day.

That's my load as well, sub IMR4895. That's the same load I use with the 150grn FMJ blasting ammo I work up as well. It's been my experience H4895 gives you a bit more velocity, but that may have just been a combination of lot variances, too.

Nosler 2nds are all I use nowadays. I've never actually found any blemishes or other issues and all that I've used have performed exceptionally well in the accuracy department.

No doubt, for the price the NCC 2nds are good, but head to head with the SMK, they don't hold up... and that's out of my Garand, my M1a, and my 24" Savage 10TAC. I was actually kind of surprised at least one of the rifles didn't shoot the NCC better... but they didn't.

 

[hps1]

H4895 a bit faster than IMR IME as well; it is listed a couple of notches faster on the burn rate chart.

SMK's are awful hard to beat, that's for sure! Shot my last match in 2001 or 2; concentrating on hunting now.

MOA is my cutoff now and haven't found any Noslers that were not up to that standard in all but one rifle (and that one refuses to shoot MOA with anything), but I'm still working on it. Hate to admit its probably due as much to my vision as to the ammo.

Regards,
hps

 

[gbw]

Update, success!

DON’T copy my loads, they were developed with my components, tools, and techniques. Yours will differ.

170 gr JFP bullets, I believe meant mainly for 30-30 Win., and I heeded Mr. Charlie98’s excellent comment that these probably aren’t meant for Garand pressures or velocities. I have a pile of these along with some BL-C(2) I’d like to be able to use. Also, grandson wants to try the Garand and M1A on deer, so…

=======================

Garand - one of the HRA Service grade Specials CMP offered a several years ago as a new condition all original rifle with replacement CMP wood…

From Hodgdons Garand section, I used the 168 gr. data, 47 gr, oal 3.20”. This seats bullet almost fully into the case neck, and along with a light crimp I had no problem with bullets moving from recoil or cycling.

24 rds.,
Avg Velocity 2510 fps. Old Pact chrono
High 2578, low 2485


One ftf, I think not related to the bullets, a cartridge was wedged crosswise while feeding. I loaded the clips in a hurry so perhaps a cartridge wasn’t seated right. This rifle has never failed before.

Accuracy was good. Shooting offhand 8” plates at 80 yds were no trouble. My range is mostly for handguns, I can shoot at longer ranges but didn’t bother, most hunting shots around here are 100 yards or less.

——————————

M1A, a standard Springfield Armory wood stock model.

Again using Hodgdons data for .308 service rifle with 168 gr bullets.

20 rds, 44 grs BL-C(2), 170 JFP, oal 2.800”

AV. 2530
High. 2582, low 2500

No failures, accuracy similar to Garand or perhaps a bit better. The Springfield has a much better trigger.

===============

Notes :
These 170 JFP bullets have a cannalure near the tip and as loaded it sits about .200” above the top of the case neck. Looks goofy but the bullets had good neck tension. They were seated down nearly to the bottom of the neck and then lightly crimped. I didn’t want to seat them any deeper which would reduce case volume and perhaps increase pressure. I didn’t notice them touching the rifling when chambered.

These are plenty hot for deer, backing down a grain or 2 probably won’t hurt at all.

Both rifles ejected very well.

I saw minor damage on the exposed soft lead flat point after loading, I doubt it affected anything.

No pressure signs.

All brass was mixed and had been fired at least twice before

CCI #34 LR primers

Case necks were lightly chamfered w/RCBS tool to ease seating

I really like both of these guns and should shoot them more

 

[hps1]

One ftf, I think not related to the bullets, a cartridge was wedged crosswise while feeding. I loaded the clips in a hurry so perhaps a cartridge wasn’t seated right. This rifle has never failed before.

OAL w/round, or flat nose bullets is a bit shy of USGI M2 Ball ammo, which averages 3.328". You may well be on to the cause of your ftf, based on my experience w/a .308 Garand which did not have the magazine spacer block installed.

The rifle fed flawlessly, probably for a thousand rounds or more, then started jamming w/ball ammo. Bullet tip occasionally lodged @ 12 o'clock above the chamber, usually on 7th round (near empty clip). The problem continued and even got worse w/time. When it actually "batted" a round completely over top of rifle, I finally figured out the issue. The op-rod spring had weakened through normal use to the point that it was not applying sufficient tension on the follower to hold the short rounds fully seated to rear of clip. Recoil of previous rounds would cause the latter rounds to work forward in the clip, giving the bolt a "running start" before contacting cartridge base, thus "batting" the latter rounds over chamber. In the case of the .308, adding a magazine block resolved the problem; of course I replaced the op-rod spring, as well.

Your loads (in addition to a less than optimal bullet ogive for the garand) cold be the cause of your single ftf.

From Hodgdons Garand section, I used the 168 gr. data, 47 gr, oal 3.20”.

Surprised that your single ftf was with the longer of the two loads as the above loaad is only .128" shy of M2 spec but lower load is .520 shy, thus not filling magazine well which allows short rounds to work forward due to recoil. Your op-rod spring is probably just fine but you may have either not seated that one round fully as you alluded to, or you could have a clip w/insufficient tension to hold all rounds fully to the rear????

ETA: Back in the day, it was common practice for GI's to rap the bullet tips in their loaded clip against the heel of their boot prior to loading to assure all rounds were fully seated in the clip.

Anyway, glad your rifle likes those bullets and your loads are working out for you, now go get a buck with the old girl.

Again using Hodgdons data for .308 service rifle with 168 gr bullets.

20 rds, 44 grs BL-C(2), 170 JFP, oal 2.800”

Regards,
hps

 

[geo57]

Thanks. I haven't worked up to 48 yet but will definitely do so. Mine shoots great but it will never be an exceptional shooter. The last 1/8 inch of the muzzle has full erosion. Best group at 100 was 1.75 inches. I am surprised it can even do what it does. But always functions great and very reliable for our military rifle matches out to 500.

You'd be surprised at how well some bores that look / are bad will still perform pretty darned well. Many decades ago I came across my first Garand that I bought knowing that the bore, TE and MW were on the south end of ugly but it was cheap and a non import. The lands & grooves literally looked like an old cast iron sewer pipe. It still would shoot minute of prairie dog consistently at 100 yards with M2 Lake City. Don't fret about your muzzles' imperfection. Best of luck with it. Enjoy.

 

[bfoosh006]

Not trying to be a PITA, but as far as ammo for a Garand, why do various places / manufacturers sell specific 30/06 factory ammo for Garands ?

https://www.federalpremium.com/rifle/american-eagle/american-eagle-rifle/11-AE3006M1.html
https://www.winchester.com/Products/Ammunition/Rifle/M1-Garand
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/30-06-springfield-168-gr-eld-m1-garand#!/

Here is a link to a VERY good article about various pressures of 30/06 ammo in a Garand. You can see 30/06 ammo can vary quite a bit in pressures.
https://www.garandgear.com/the-m1-garand-and-commercial-ammunition/

In the Final thoughts portion..
"Three factors can result in damage occurring to the operating rod. The first is high pressure in the gas cylinder. The second is the binding of the operating rod. The third is caused by poor lubrication. If any two of the three conditions are present, then damage is possible. If the operating rod is binding, the operating rod will flex and bend when cycling until the bind is overcome"