Can M1 brass be used for 30-06?

[2zulu1]

Despite what's printed, there is plenty of actual evidence to the contrary.

Example:

http://carteach0.blogspot.com/2012/05/military-brass-is-thicker-and-heavier.html

"On average, the commercial brass was heavier than all the military. Both Lake City and the commercial were heavier than the Greek HXP military."

Interesting read; however, the LC 52/53/4 brass I just finished weighing are more in the green graph zone with a weight difference of 8.3 grains.

Somewhere I have some HPX casings that I expect to be near the WRA brass weights, maybe I should get out the SA Match and head out to the range and weigh some 'fresh' brass.

 

[MEHavey]

I was about to ask the point of all this, then decided to just boil it down.

- Standardize on a (any) brass and its volume. Record it.
- New brands/lots of brass should be 're-volumed' and loads adjusted up or down.
- Don't bank the farm on anyone else's 'general' weights, rules or volumes posted or published.

Do it yourself. It isn't hard

 

[ranger335v]

"...if you've ever dealt with 7.62x51 brass fired in a M60 with a large chamber, you would understand perfectly."

Oh, would I?

For decades I made a good bit of surplus 7.62 and .30-06 stuff into .22-250 and 6mm International; might that have given me some insight into the real effects of "brass fired in a M60 with a large chamber" in comparision to a smaller? Seems if we lube any 7.62 case properly and slide it fully into a .308 FL die we will be perfectly done. At least I think so, but ... maybe not. ??

 

[2zulu1]

30-06 USGI Mil Surp various brass headstamp weights

Hopefully the above title will assist those who are interested in handloading the M1 Garand and the handloader will heed warnings/remarks published in the current Sierra #5 (Federal brass), Nosler #6 (Nosler brass) and Lyman #49 (Winchester brass) reloading manuals. For those who shoot their Garands at extended distances and use mil surp brass, it's always a good idea to weigh your brass for shot consistency.

I have about 1,000+ mil surp brass dating from the WWII and Korean War era and chose to average about 10 brass casings per headstamp. Given that there are thousands of individual headstamps from a multitude of countries, this list is far from being representative, but it does support the premise that mil surp brass is constructed heavier than commercial 30-06 brass, namely Winchester, and it should be loaded accordingly. As Lyman advises, maximum Garand loads should be kept 1.0-2.0 grains less than their maximum commercial brass loads given the Garand's powder and bullet weight/type limitations.

Winchester commercial (10)
Avg186.0 grains
Lo 185.1 - Hi 186.4 - spread 1.3 grains

WRA 42 (7)
Ave 189.5
185.4 - 201.2 - spread 15.8 grains

WRA 55 (10)
Avg 190.2 grains
Lo 185.6 - 192.6 spread 6.5 grains

TW 42 (10) Twin Cities
Avg 196.7 grains
Lo 195.1 - Hi 199.9 spread 4.8 grains

TW 5 (10)
Avg 200.5 grains
Lo 197.4 - Hi. 202.9 spread 5.5 grains

SL 53 (10) St Louis
Avg 199.0 grains
Lo 192.1 - Hi 201.8 spread 9.7 grains

LC 52 (10) Lake City
Average 197.6 grains
Lo 195.7 - Hi 200.1 spread 5.4 grains

LC 53 (10)
Average 195.7 grains
Lo 191.8 - Hi 198.3 springs 6.5 grains

LC 4 (5)
Average 193.6 grains
Lo 187.7 - Hi 195.9 spread 8.2 grains

RA 42 (23) Remington Arms
Average 201.0
Lo 196.8 - Hi 204.0 spread 7.2 grains

RA 51 (10)
Average 198.4 grains
Lo 196.7 - Hi 201.5 spread 4.8 grains

FA Match 58 (7) Frankford Arsenal
Average 197.8 grains
Lo 195.7 - Hi 199.7 spread 4.0 grains

FA Match 59 (12)
Average 197.7 grains
Lo 196.5 - 201.3 spread 4.8 grains

4-54
SF I
7.62 (5) Societe Francaise des Munitions, Moulineaux, France
Average 199.6 grains
Lo 198.0 - 202.7 spread 4.7 grains

For fun
Peters 3G1906 (3)
205.5
205.6
206.8 grains

I came across a number of LC 42 and to lesser degree DM 42 (Des Moines) brass later on during the sorting process and since they were of heavier construction as those above, I didn't include them in the list.

 

[BBDartCA]

Nosler = 181.8g
RP = 195.9g
"Super Speed" = 186.6g
FC = 203.2g
Winchester = 185.9g
LC (various dated headstamp) = 193.4g
UMC = 206.4g
Super-X = 183.1g
WW Super = 188.5g
PPU = 180.2g
Norma = 181.8

.

That's my data I posted a while back.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=622976&highlight=30-06+weight

Brass weight does not correlate to case capacity necessarily. Other factors can influence the weight. If I did not have a life, I'd find this brass, and measure case capacity of each, and plot the correlation.

 

[MEHavey]

If I did not have a life, I'd find this brass, and measure case capacity of each, and plot the correlation.

You and I agree... on both points above.

 

[PlusP]

A little of topic, I have some old primed crimped 30-06 brass stamped
WRA 45 ..I loaded some and the primer seemed a little slow and it turned out they are corrosive ... I deprimed them and they look ok is there any way the primers could have weakened the brass by being in them all these years ???? Thanks,Randy

 

[2zulu1]

That's my data I posted a while back.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=622976&highlight=30-06+weight

Brass weight does not correlate to case capacity necessarily. Other factors can influence the weight. If I did not have a life, I'd find this brass, and measure case capacity of each, and plot the correlation.

But case weight can and does affect powder weight. While some use water, and I'm not saying using water is not viable, but powder can also be used. Nosler uses case powder volumes in their data to assist the handloader.

For the discussion of this thread I broke out the very popular Garand powder IMR 4895 and weighed the difference between a random commercial Winchester case and random mil surp TW 5 case.

Winchester empty - 186.1 grains
full 251.0 grains
capacity 64.9 grains

TW 5 empty - 201.6 grains
full 265.3 grains
capacity 63.7 grains

Difference between the two casings is the TW 5 mil surp held 1.2 less grains than the Winchester commercial casing.

Don't know if these figures work back for 75-80% load capacity etc, but there is certainly a quantifiable difference between these two casings that were measured.

The staffs at Sierra, Nosler and Lyman are shooters just like the rest of us and their respective data bases reflect their research and what they publish.

While there is an overlap in case capacities between commercial and mil surp brass, I can see no reason to continue to beat a dead horse to satisfy the egos of a few.

 

[TexasShooter59]

I'm glad I asked about the M1/30-06 brass as it opened up a pretty good discussion!

 

[Hacker15E]

Thanks for taking the time to record and post that data, 2zulu1!

 

[MEHavey]

Winchester commercial (10)
Avg186.0 grains
Lo 185.1 - Hi 186.4 - spread 1.3 grains

Do your empty weights include spent primers (so you can then fill the case w/ powder and weigh again?

 

[2zulu1]

Do your empty weights include spent primers (so you can then fill the case w/ powder and weigh again?

Post #33 answers your question.

If you need further clarification may I suggest you decap a commercial/USGI case, fill with a few grains of IMR 4895 and time how long it takes to empty out the powder in the casing through the flash hole.

 

[2zulu1]

I'm glad I asked about the M1/30-06 brass as it opened up a pretty good discussion!

It's turned out to be an informative and insightful thread.

I take the Garand pressure warnings found in the reloading manuals seriously, same principle as the 40 S&W unsupported chamber warnings.

 

[MEHavey]

If you need further clarification...

I ask because my Winchester bulk cases weigh 2-3 grains more, even new/unprimed.

Second, powder -- especially extruded powder like 4895 -- is subject to settling when used as a volume measure. So I will probably continue to run water volume for individual case lots/manufactuers (e.g, Win/Lapua/HXP), and use that in QuickLoad to adjust powder weights to maintain pressure/velocities in loads I've standardized for velocity in the AR, the M1 & the M1A. (It's worked pretty good so far)

 

[2zulu1]

I ask because my Winchester bulk cases weigh 2-3 grains more, even new/unprimed.

Second, powder -- especially extruded powder like 4895 -- is subject to settling when used as a volume measure. So I will probably continue to run water volume for individual case lots/manufactuers (e.g, Win/Lapua/HXP), and use that in QuickLoad to adjust powder weights to maintain pressure/velocities in loads I've standardized for velocity in the AR, the M1 & the M1A. (It's worked pretty good so far)

I find this post contrary to the Winchester average brass weight of 185.9 grains (post #30 quote), nearly identical to the Winchester brass weight I posted, 186.1 grains.

Now you write that your Winchester brass weighs 188/189 grains unprimed, how many other other weight changes can we expect?

While powder volumes can settle a bit over time, IMR 4895 in the above test did not settle for any reason and the weight would not have changed regardless because additional powder was not added to the commercial or USGI casing.

Do you have sufficient USGI mil surp brass from the WWII and Korean War era to proceed with your experiment?

I found it very informative that the French manufactured 7.62x63mm brass was a much heavier construction than the Greek brass weight posted.

 

[MEHavey]

186.5-188 empty when I weighed several out of the plastic bags I still have.
Take a look at post 23 "when I went downstairs..." using 2X fired primed cases.
Since I use water weight, I will always use primed cases.

As to how many other changes I might expect, it becomes irreverent as I weigh every lot and go from there.
(and where did the USGI milsurp from WWII and Korea become an issue?)

The only issue in this entire thread has been that of using one type/volume of case vice another as it relates to pressure. Since that case volume change can have dramatic effect on that pressure, my counsel remains that the re-loader spend 5 minutes to do his own water weight comparison when changing components, and not rely on the internet.

 

[USSR]

...powder -- especially extruded powder like 4895 -- is subject to settling when used as a volume measure. So I will probably continue to run water volume for individual case lots/manufactuers (e.g, Win/Lapua/HXP)...

+1.

Don

 

[FROGO207]

I have been following the thread myself.

Thanks to all those that weighed in on this safety matter.
There is some great info added for those of us that don't have the old data/brass to draw conclusions from. Again it becomes apparent that ALL brass can be different from yours and the bottom line is---to be safe figure out the case capacity of yours with whatever method you want to use and apply that as the final result. Me I am in no way an expert on reloading (have been doing it for 40+ years so far) and there is still a LOT to learn I am afraid.

 

[MEHavey]

Over on the Firing line this afternoon, Jim Watson remembered...

"Once upon a time a moderately technical publication named The American Rifleman
(not to be confused with the present collection of political bulletins and manufacturers'
press releases of the same name) recommended that powder charge be reduced by one grain
for every 11 grains of empty case weight...."

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5102777&postcount=4

Turns out after looking at what that means relative to the volume variance and QuickLoad, it's a pretty doggone good rule of thumb for medium/large military cartridges.

 

[2zulu1]

Over on the Firing line this afternoon, Jim Watson remembered...http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5102777&postcount=4

Turns out after looking at what that means relative to the volume variance and QuickLoad, it's a pretty doggone good rule of thumb for medium/large military cartridges.

Perhaps you should start your own 308 thread on THR instead of substituting 308 data for 30-06 Garand data.

 

[2zulu1]

186.5-188 empty when I weighed several out of the plastic bags I still have.
Take a look at post 23 "when I went downstairs..." using 2X fired primed cases.
Since I use water weight, I will always use primed cases.

As to how many other changes I might expect, it becomes irreverent as I weigh every lot and go from there.
(and where did the USGI milsurp from WWII and Korea become an issue?)

The only issue in this entire thread has been that of using one type/volume of case vice another as it relates to pressure. Since that case volume change can have dramatic effect on that pressure, my counsel remains that the re-loader spend 5 minutes to do his own water weight comparison when changing components, and not rely on the internet.

Now that I've become "irreverent" in responding to your posts, the issue on this thread has been that several forum members have steadfastly taken the position to ignore safety warnings and load any USGI mil surp brass to commercial brass load weights and then shoot those loads through Garands.

If you had war vintage brass to calculate operating pressures of war vintage Garands you would have done so by now, but you've chosen to make personal attacks instead.

 

[hang fire]

Just remember that all standard issue GI brass is thicker walled and has less capacity than it's civilian counterpart.

But I have scads of NM 7.62x51 brass and it has more capacity than the GI standard issue, also the primers were not crimped in.

 

[USSR]

Just remember that all standard issue GI brass is thicker walled and has less capacity than it's civilian counterpart.

Just not true when it comes to the .30-06. Have been loading it for decades for my Garands and my custom built Tactical Rifle. True for the 7.62x51, but definitely not true for the .30-06.

Don

 

[MEHavey]

It was the weight changes that became irrelevant, 2Zulu, not yourself. As I run
water volume measures on all new lots and go from there, I don't worry about
the changes. My apologies if offense was seen as none was intended.

But... you (and many others) might be interested the weight changes that do occur
within the same manufacturer's line per UncleNick's experience:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5103458&postcount=16

 

[2zulu1]

Just about everyone who loads for the Garand has come across this website, but the link for those who haven't ;

http://masterpostemple.bravepages.com/M1load.htm