M1d Accuracy

[Rick]

When Springfield Armory was filling the M1d orders in 51,52, and 1953 how did they select barrels?

I know they had optical equipment to check for straightness and air gauging to check barrels for consistency in the boring. Also in the later years they did some tweaking in the free bore. I'm assuming they did this to improve accuracy with the 172 gr National Match ammunition.

In March of 1953 the army ordered Springfield Armory to produce type 1 National Match rifles. These were assembled from select part and barrels that meet of surpassed the higher end of specifications. Did this end the M1d program and did they use skills learned in the M1d program to build the type 1 National Match Riles?

Has anyone ever seen an original M1d barrel manufactured after March, 1953?

On the CMP forum people have stated that the M1d were no more accurate than the standard service rifle. I don't know if this was from their personal experience or from something they have read. My experience is limited to one and in my case it is very accurate and will compete with the best of the best.

What are your first hand experiences with the accuracy of the M1d ? Also if they were built to service grade standards why would the barrel have a different part number. I know any service grade rifle can be made into the
M1d configuration and many have been made up. Just putting a scope on a service grade would help a little but not turn them into super accurate rifles.

What I'm interested is in the accuracy of original M1D's produced by Springfield Armory.

[Badgerord]

The print for the M1D barrel calls out the same straightness and bore diameters as the
Service barrel, it is likely that the D's were taken better care of or even not shot much.
The only difference is the reduced diameter for and the addition of the Scope base.

In 1996 I was in the South Dakota Army National Guard arms room at Camp Rapid
and observed 14 M1D rifles that the Armorer said have not been out of the arms room since they were received from rebuild in 1965.

[LanceS4803@aol.com]

From talking to the folks at AAD, the Guard is still turning them in!

[Maury Krupp]

I seem to recall reading somewhere (think it was a GCA Journal article?) that the acceptance standards for M1C and M1D weren't remarkably higher than a standard rifle. Something like a standard rifle had to place all shots inside or touching a 4in circle at 100yd while a C or D had to have them all *inside*

One of the reasons the M1D replaced the M1C as "Standard" was the ease in which they could be converted from existing rifles. Instead of the expensive and involved process required for the M1C all that needed to be done to make a D was screw on the new barrel & mount.

Sniping and sniper rifles at the time of the M1D's design and adoption weren't what they are today.

For starters most of the match accurizing techniques eventually used on M1s weren't known at the time and aren't suited to a combat rifle anyway.

Besides, all the Army wanted was the standard service rifle with optics. Standard so it was easy to train and maintain; optics so it was slightly better for point targets at the far edge of the effective range or in low light.

And that's about all an M1D is.

Maury

[alongshot50]

take it or leave it mine will shoot 3/4 to 1.5 in at 100yd with FGMM168. my hand load are about 1 in ...good gun not the shooter

[Rick]

Mine shoots the same. So I believe.

[Griff Murphey]

My M-1D is a CMP Lottery gun, all GI. I have coaxed groups a little smaller than 2" out of it at 100 yards. The problem is that the groups will walk, particularly between shooting sessions, or sometimes in the middle of shooting sessions.

[Rick]

Possibly something loose?

On one rifle I had that problem and it disappeared when I tried a different operating rod spring. Probably a easy fix but one of those that will drive you nuts until you shake it out.