View Full Version : 30-06 armor piercing ammo
Major Tom
09-13-2023, 05:53
I have a chance to buy military surplus 30-06 armor piercing ammo made in late 1940s.
Is this stuff OK to shoot in my M1 Garand? I'm thinking pressure problems and/or bending op rod.
Thanks for replies
It is safe for your Garand. In fact in WWII a lot of infantrymen preferred it to ball if they could get it and a cartridge belt full of clips loaded with M2 AP was not unusual.
But...the stuff is corrosive. Clean accordingly.
Milsurp ammo for a Milsurp Garand,
match made in heaven,
be sure to clean well,
barretcreek
09-13-2023, 04:01
Save it for next summer. Antifa may upgrade their pajamas.
Johnny P
09-13-2023, 04:45
Standard M2 Ball weighed 150 grains, where AP was 152. The rifle will never know the difference.
"Starting late in 1943, black tip M2 AP was issued as the 'standard' round for infantry use for the rest of the war. In the pacific theater, it was better able to penetrate log bunkers, etc. and in Europe, it was effective against German light armored vehicles as well as personnel."
Standard M2 Ball weighed 150 grains, where AP was 152. The rifle will never know the difference.
"Starting late in 1943, black tip M2 AP was issued as the 'standard' round for infantry use for the rest of the war. In the pacific theater, it was better able to penetrate log bunkers, etc. and in Europe, it was effective against German light armored vehicles as well as personnel."
typo Johnny? AP is more than 152 grns
Johnny P
09-13-2023, 07:32
Absolutely. How about 162 grains. Also, the M72 Match ammo was used in the M1 Rifle with no problems, and it's bullet was 173 grains.
Here we go. It seems I recall posts where 173 was spit on. Now, 168 in my old American Enfield was always better than 150.
Black tipped AP will almost go through 1 inch of soft steel. 8mm will go clear through. I've done it. It also makes a good center punch. I want to say it's made of Cobalt or something. Was Titanium even around back then? I don't remember which co. made this bullet.
53726
You see that these little slugs were machined, not poured into a mold. I used to have 1000 8mm rds. of these. I sold them all off except for the last 100. I don't even have an 8mm but I have a hundred in 30-06. I never want to be without some.
Johnny P
09-14-2023, 07:02
Out of curiosity pulled an M2 AP. 163.2 grains. Have read that the weight varies slightly, maybe due to penetrator not having to be exact diameter?
I tilted picture, but scale was leveled.
https://i.postimg.cc/rwrh0D7X/M2AP.jpg
160 - 175 gr. seems to be a sweet spot for .30-06 US Military weapons. I found 165 -168 gr bullets at about 2,600 fps to work exceptionally well in my rifles.
I got out my copy of Brophy again and the cores of the .30 AP rounds were/are tungsten alloy. I have some squirreled away but not enough I'm interested in shooting it any more. LOL I suppose I'll use it if I'm ever attacked by a bunch of Panzer Grenadiers.
dryheat; 8mm Mauser is a real thumper. Probably the most powerful WWII rifle cartridge in the 198 gr. boat tail mode which whistles down range at 2,500 fps + or - a bit. Past 250 - 300 yards it leaves .30-06 in the dust. It's a tremendous penetrator even in the regular plain old ball mode.
One of my favorite pastimes was shooting at boulders with the 8mm "way out there". One guy would spot and the other shoot. We could get it dialed in to about trash can lid. We guessed we were shooting out to about 600 yrds. but I got a laser and it was a little disappointing to find out it was less than 300. It was still big fun.
Have found that M-2 AP is quite the dandy for punching holes through stuff, everything from railroad track and such right on to great big thick old Cypress stumps that have been sitting since they were cut in the 1950's. Some of the stumps were real whoppers ... at least 3 or more foot thick. The railroad tracks were scrap pieces that were pulled out of a pile of junk metal. When the CMP was selling nice AP I was thrilled to get several cases. Sold some. Kept the vast majority. Never know when I'll get up to Alaska ... need to be prepared for big bears. Figure regardless of angle of presentation, a clip load of AP in my M-1 will calm down the biggest grizzly. Can't imagine AP would even slow up on the skull, etc. Sincerely. bruce.
Vern Humphrey
09-17-2023, 04:07
When my M2 carbine got wrapped around a tree and I bummed an M1 rifle from the ARVN all they had was black tip AP. I love that stuff! If you have any idea of where the bastard is, just shoot all around that spot until you stop drawing return fire.
P.
Major Tom
09-18-2023, 04:44
"If you have any idea of where the bastard is, just shoot all around that spot until you stop drawing return fire."
That's why I liked the M14. Rounds would penetrate trees, logs and heavy brush.
P.[/QUOTE]
Vern Humphrey
09-18-2023, 08:41
"If you have any idea of where the bastard is, just shoot all around that spot until you stop drawing return fire."
That's why I liked the M14. Rounds would penetrate trees, logs and heavy brush.
Amen! In combat, penetration is the key.
IIRC, when a decision was being made about caliber for the M-1 rifle, one reason Gen. Mac Arthur insisted on the .30-06 cartridge was that a "infantry rifle simply must be able to shoot through things." Sincerely. bruce.
Vern Humphrey
09-19-2023, 10:26
IIRC, when a decision was being made about caliber for the M-1 rifle, one reason Gen. Mac Arthur insisted on the .30-06 cartridge was that a "infantry rifle simply must be able to shoot through things." Sincerely. bruce.
Now if he'd only done away with the en bloc clip and substituted a sheet metal magazine.
IIRC, when a decision was being made about caliber for the M-1 rifle, one reason Gen. Mac Arthur insisted on the .30-06 cartridge was that a "infantry rifle simply must be able to shoot through things." Sincerely. bruce.
Maybe, The .276 Pedersen cartridge driving a 125 gr bullet at about 2750 feet per second was definitely not up to the .30-06 in either penetration or maximum effective range. But the deciding reason was the U.S. had many millions of rounds of .30-06 ammunition on hand that would have been made obsolete by the new .276 cal. ammunition. Also, the rifle caliber machine guns, including the BAR would have to be modified to take the new cartridge or replaced. In the middle of the great depression just getting a new rifle approved was a very big deal. New ammo was absolutely out of the question. One thing about the .276 round I would have liked was the M1 would have had a capacity of 10 with that cartridge instead of 8 rounds of .30.06.
Now if he'd only done away with the en bloc clip and substituted a sheet metal magazine.
That would be a great idea but unfortunately the Ordnance Corps. folks didn't like the detatachable magazine fearing it would get lost or be damaged. That didn't seem to stop the French, Russians or Germans from using sheet metal detachable box magazines on their contemporary semi auto rifles. Mr. Garand came up with a brilliant, though imperfect solution to this dumb requirement and all in all his design was far superior to the Rooskie Tokarevs and German Tokarev based G43s.
Fortunately the M14 rectified the problem.
Vern Humphrey
09-19-2023, 10:51
That would be a great idea but unfortunately the Ordnance Corps. folks didn't like the detatachable magazine fearing it would get lost or be damaged. That didn't seem to stop the French, Russians or Germans from using sheet metal magazines on their contemporary semi auto rifles. Mr. Garand came up with a brilliant, though imperfect solution to this dumb requirement and all in all his design was far superior to the Rooskie Tokarevs and German Tokarev based G43.
The Garand was a superior design, to be sure -- it's flaw was it was hard to manufacture. During WWII, Winchester was our only commercial source of Garands. Eliminating the en bloc would have made the rifle much easier to produce.
The Garand was a superior design, to be sure -- it's flaw was it was hard to manufacture. During WWII, Winchester was our only commercial source of Garands. Eliminating the en bloc would have made the rifle much easier to produce.
Which is what the Italians did creating the BM59.
The Garand was a superior design, to be sure -- it's flaw was it was hard to manufacture. During WWII, Winchester was our only commercial source of Garands. Eliminating the en bloc would have made the rifle much easier to produce.
Big + 1 Absolutely!! The complex feed system was a big contributor to that manufacturing problem. The box magazine on the M1 Carbine made it amenable to manufacture by a large number of companies. It was manufactured in vast numbers over a very short period of time. I can't imagine juke box companies or manufacturers of business machines making M1 Garands.
Vern Humphrey
09-19-2023, 01:58
Big + 1 Absolutely!! The complex feed system was a big contributor to that manufacturing problem. The box magazine on the M1 Carbine made it amenable to manufacture by a large number of companies. It was manufactured in vast numbers over a very short period of time. I can't imagine juke box companies or manufacturers of business machines making M1 Garands.
In fact the en bloc clip was eliminated in the M14 -- which is one hell of a rifle in it's own sake.
The Garand was a superior design, to be sure -- it's flaw was it was hard to manufacture. During WWII, Winchester was our only commercial source of Garands. Eliminating the en bloc would have made the rifle much easier to produce.
well,
depending on the source, the 2 made between 4.8 to 5.4 Million rifles,
and remember, there were 10 makers of Carbines, including Winchester
BAR, 1919's, M2's 1911's, Thompsons, Grease Guns, and shotguns for the troops, (and modifed models for Armor and Air) etc etc being made at that time,
there may not have been any capacity left for another commercial operation to make them,
Major Tom
09-24-2023, 05:34
Winchester was the only company making garands during WW2? I have a 1944 Springfield garand.
Johnny P
09-24-2023, 07:08
Winchester was the only company making garands during WW2? I have a 1944 Springfield garand.
The key word is "commercial".
"Winchester was our only commercial source of Garands."
Vern Humphrey
09-24-2023, 02:13
well,
depending on the source, the 2 made between 4.8 to 5.4 Million rifles,
and remember, there were 10 makers of Carbines, including Winchester
BAR, 1919's, M2's 1911's, Thompsons, Grease Guns, and shotguns for the troops, (and modifed models for Armor and Air) etc etc being made at that time,
there may not have been any capacity left for another commercial operation to make them,
Except the Army let contracts for other suppliers and various companies bid on and won those contracts, but were not able to deliver rifles that met the Army's standards. It wasn't until after the war that other companies managed to successfully manufacture Garands.
Except the Army let contracts for other suppliers and various companies bid on and won those contracts, but were not able to deliver rifles that met the Army's standards. It wasn't until after the war that other companies managed to successfully manufacture Garands.
who?
Winchester had issues, (they did with the 1917 and P14 too for a bit) but they got the Garand bits going good , as in they worked,
post war,, as in Korea and beyond, was just International and H&R, (commercial, and Springfield was still a Govt arsenal) both had teething pains and supply issues but worked as well if not better than Winchester
Winchester also got the M14 contract too, including replacement barrels in the 60's,
not taking up for them too much, but they made a ton of stuff for the US and kept up the commercial side a bit too,
shame they are nothing but a name now
Vern Humphrey
09-25-2023, 07:08
International Harvester and H&R had contracts to build Garands in WWII. They were not able to produce rifles to standard, and all they produced had to be re-worked at Springfield.
International Harvester and H&R had contracts to build Garands in WWII. They were not able to produce rifles to standard, and all they produced had to be re-worked at Springfield.
Believe these 2 made Garands after WWII only.
Vern Humphrey
09-25-2023, 07:59
Believe these 2 made Garands after WWII only.
They had contracts during WWII
Some good parts were made by companies that could not build the complete rifle. H&R made a lot more trigger groups than complete rifles and of course there was the LMR barrels.
Didn't I. H. Use some H&R trigger groups?
Johnny P
09-25-2023, 11:13
The Military Integration Committee made sure no one ran out of parts, and had parts transferred from a manufacturer with a surplus of a particular part to a manufacturer that was about to run short. H&R used some LMR barrels in the 5 to 5.1 million serial number range.
This was done through the "free issue" program where the manufacturer didn't have to pay for the parts transferred to them, but the value of the parts transferred was deducted from their invoice of completed weapons. The manufacturer that the parts were transferred from was credited with the value of the parts.
They had contracts during WWII
need a link please,
like Allen, and going by Duff,
they are post war
Some good parts were made by companies that could not build the complete rifle. H&R made a lot more trigger groups than complete rifles and of course there was the LMR barrels.
Didn't I. H. Use some H&R trigger groups?
H&R, IIRC, and Johnny, please correct me if I am wrong, used some Marlin barrels,
I picked one up at a show in the 90's, guy had gotten the correct H&R that would have used that barrel, but since he thought all H&R's had H&R barrels, he replaced it,
and I got a damn good deal on it,
made a nice shooting rifle using a spare receiver I had at the time
People replace things that they "know" are wrong when they shouldn't. Back when CMP was very cooperative with buyers they would send HRA windage knobs to people who were upset that theirs was marked DRC. All they did was diminish the true value of an HRA rifle. But most folks don't know the difference anyway.
"if you see it enough, there might be something to it". When IHC shut down, or was about to, it seems SA picked up a lot of their parts. This is just my assumption, but I've seen enough IHC parts on SA rifles to think they were original. Red has a good question. HRA rifles seem to end up with H-R safeties enough for me to think that it might have been part of post war building. But I could be totally wrong. It could be sellers who figure, they won't know the difference.
Marlin barrels: There were two batches. The first is thought to be poorly made and the second is OK. I've had a couple. [I tried to find a document but nein]. As I recall they were both on Springfield rifles.
HRA made barrels before they made rifles. I had a 1951(?) marked HRA barrel but I can't find the picture. I used to have loads of pics and documents about this stuff but I'm not very organized.
Johnny P
09-27-2023, 04:00
The only post WW2 M1 Rifle barrels used in the building of the rifles were Springfield Armory, LMR, and HRA.
To the best of my knowledge Marlin only produced barrels for the M1 Carbine.
Illl see if I can dig that gun out of the safe,
I may be mistaken on the maker,
however, the info I found on it was in Duff's books iirc
The only post WW2 M1 Rifle barrels used in the building of the rifles were Springfield Armory, LMR, and HRA.
To the best of my knowledge Marlin only produced barrels for the M1 Carbine.
And Winchester. I've seen several Winchester barrels stamped 1967. They got no respect from collectors because they weren't early.
Then there are the Buffalo Arms barrels. I've had one of those too.
Mystery barrel:
"AY" was the manufactures code for "parts " that were manufactured by Ferro for GM and Ford,and later Contracts for M-1 parts.
It's probably an F in a circle which is the mark of Ferro Machine & Foundry. They started showing up on Garrands sold through the CMP that had been brought back to the US from some foreigh country. So it's believed they were a Govt' contractor who made barrels for one of our allies.
[copied from someones post]
I found the '51 HRA barrel.
One of the last SA barrels made.
5379253793
These were both mine.Even a blind hog stumbles over an acorn one in a while.
Johnny P
09-28-2023, 07:32
I believe Winchester received a contract for replacement barrels after production had ceased on the rifles. They weren't used in new production, and were marked differently from the WW2 barrels.
I believe Winchester received a contract for replacement barrels after production had ceased on the rifles. They weren't used in new production, and were marked differently from the WW2 barrels.
The ones made during WWII were stamped WRA. Post war were stamped Winchester.
I believe Winchester received a contract for replacement barrels after production had ceased on the rifles. They weren't used in new production, and were marked differently from the WW2 barrels.
You are right.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.