M1 NM 30-06 "Go To Load"

[Hip's Ax]

Is there a generally agreed "go to service rifle load" for a 30-06 Garand similar to the 7.62 load of a 168 gr Sierra over 41.5 grains of IMR 4895?

Just curious, of course we should always start low and work up.

Thanks in advance.

[Maury Krupp]

46.5 H or IMR4895 or 47.0gr IMR4064 +/- .5gr for all.

Any good 168 or 175 match bullet.

Maury

[Parashooter]

Same as your 7.62 "go to" load except for about 5 grains more 4895 in the '06 case.

[Hip's Ax]

Thanks Guys!

Now, I recall a discussion on the old forum about VV N140 (?) being the best propellant for 30-06 NM loads? I'm sure I remember Big John extolling its virtues. Anybody recall or maybe have a copy of that discussion?

I'm getting a little antsy, Major Stuph e-mailed me a few days ago that my "As Good As It Can Get" M1 NM in 30-06 is close to being finished.

[Maury Krupp]

N140 is a very consistent, very clean burning powder that meters well through most powder measures. It works very well with 168gr bullets or lighter in .30-'06. It's nearly identical to IMR4064 for charge weights.

However, when I loaded it with Sierra 175MK in .30-'06 it tore rims off. It didn't happen during testing; only during matches. I also suspect it bent an Op Rod.

I bought a McCann Adjustable Gas Cylinder Lock Screw but never got around to doing much with it because around the same time all VV powders ran into import problems making them unavailable.

I decided N140 wasn't worth the hassle or expense compared to the simplicity and proven record of loads with 4895 and 4064.

Maury

[Griff Murphey]

I shoot a slightly lighter load of either 168 SMK's or my old stash of pulled 173 gr. with 43 grs. of Hogden's 4895. This is fine for 200 yard CMP shoots. It might be a little shy for 600 yard work.

[John Kepler]

To echo what Maury said.....only I don't have any more problems getting VV N140 than I do 4064, so that part of the equation isn't an issue for me. N140 IS generally harder to find and costs a little more (not much anymore), but I continue to feel that it's worth the small additional expense. It's SCARY consistent powder and will generate SD and extreme spread numbers that will have you scratching your head and wondering if your chronometer's busted. Also, in nearly 20 years of loading it.....I have NEVER had the slightest variation between powder lots, not even a smidge.....one can shoots exactly like the can before it, and the one that'll come after it! That is NOT something I can say about any other powder. Even more important in a Garand/M14....the stuff is CLEAN! No more coking, no more digging coal out of your M14 gas piston with a drill. What residue you do get is a soft gray powder that you can wipe off with a Kleenex (in a land covered in trees, the Finns make their nitrocellulose out of cotton fiber rather than wood-pulp making almost pure NC with VERY little contamination....wood-pulp powders have around 10% unreacted tannins in their NC, which is the coke, crud, smoke, and flash that you don't get using cotton fiber).

The "negatives" are exactly as Maury has stated them....cost and availability. The "advantages" are pretty much as I have stated them. Whether those "advantages" out-weigh the PITA factor involved in the "negatives", particularly in a Service Rifle where "close enough" probably is "good enough" is highly subjective......4064 is every bit as capable of shooting an X out of a Servicee Rifle as N140 is. For me, the answer to that "cost-benefit" equation is simple....for anyone else...YMMV!

[Hip's Ax]

Gentlemen, I Thank You For Your Time. Getting this kind of experienced advice is priceless. I will stick with 4895 and 4064 for now. This rifle was a long time coming (I've been collecting parts for 10 years) and I am excited to know I will be getting it in the foreseeable future.

I'll busy myself prepping brass (I have a 20mm can of Virgin LC NM 78 30-06 brass) and making up short line magazine length test lots. I'll have to wait for the long line test lots until I can measure the distance to the lands after I get the rifle.

Got to Love CSP!!

[Willo]

Check out these 2 links for some very good load info on the M1.
NRA M1 Garand Load Info;

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

M1 Garand Loads;

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?169259-M1-Garand-reloading

Hope this helps.

[John Kepler]

It's load data, it's also OLD data....but I question how "good" it is! Does NOT come close to my or anyone elses optimal/accurate/competition loads. Listen to Maury!

[Plain Old Dave]

All right, question:

Will my M72 zeroes work with 46.5 of IMR4895 , M72 brass, and pulled M118s or 175gr SMKs?

[Johnny in Texas]

In 1963 the NM load was 46.7 gr 4895 2640 FPS 173 gr bullet I have loaded 47.0 Gr 4895 for 168-175 bullets with exell. results. ******* I always load in LC match brass********
2640 FPS is optimum vel. for those bullets in an M1 or bolt gun.

I have seen loads with up to 50.0 gr 4895 with vel. around 2800

M118 Match load I use is 42.5 4895 in LC Match brass with 175.O SMK bullet, I have mixed this load with factory M118LR and shot for groups under 1 MOA out of a Rem. 700 w/26" barrel.

[gulliver62]

I like to use the Nosler 155g Custom Competition. Very accurate and some relief on the recoil.
Start at 47g of 4895 and work up to 48g to see what shoots best.

[Andy/CA]

46.5 H or IMR4895 or 47.0gr IMR4064 +/- .5gr for all.

Any good 168 or 175 match bullet.

Maury

Hey Maury,

Do you reduce the charge with LC or mil capacity brass, or have you found no difference? Thanks!

[Maury Krupp]

Do you reduce the charge with LC or mil capacity brass, or have you found no difference?

All my brass is USGI or HXP.

FWIW I compared a few random commercial cases (FA or Win) to USGI by weighing empty and full of water. Didn't really find any major differences.

Maury