M1 Garand Load

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by RugerNo1shooter, Feb 5, 2010.

  1. RugerNo1shooter

    RugerNo1shooter Active Member

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Does anyone have a M1 Garand load (30-06 not the 308 versions....mine is an original Springfield) that has consistently shot well for them? I've heard that the heavier bullets tend to do well with garands? Up to 200gr?

    any advice is appreciated

    Pat
     
  2. rg1

    rg1 Member

    Messages:
    8
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Standard advice loading for an M1 Garand is to use powder with a burn rate between IMR 4895 and IMR 4064 and NO bullets heavier than 180 grains. Powders outside the above burn rate or heavier than 180 grain bullets can and eventually will damage the op rod of your rifle. Most accurate bullets in the Garand seem to be the 168 grain match bullets and the most often used powder for them seems to be IMR 4064. Here is a site that lists some max loads recommended by the NRA:
    M1 load data (courtesy of NRA)
     

  3. RugerNo1shooter

    RugerNo1shooter Active Member

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Thank you! I'll compare those with my hornady load manual see how spicey they are!

    Pat
     
  4. roninflag

    roninflag Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,226
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    "precision shooting with the m1-garand "by roy baumgardner says it was designed for powders slower than 3031 and no slower than 4320. with i-4895 46.5 and a 168 i shot a .27, .29, .33. the national match load of 173 at 2720 can be duplicated with i-4064 and a 175. varget is another good powder.
     
  5. Southwind

    Southwind Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    96
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    4064 and Varget have worked real well for me using 168's. I have used everybody's 168's but have had best results in my Garand with Nosler Custom Comp 168's. I am in the 48 grain area on my load but please start at least 10% lower and work up.

    With the gas piston operating rod the heavier bullets are ill advised. I would stick with 168's they have performed wonderfully for me for years at the 600 yard line. Chink clang!
     
  6. Kevin Thomas

    Kevin Thomas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,256
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Pretty much already covered here, but 46-47 grains of 4895 and a 168 was simply THE National Match load for decades. It's already been touched upon here, but always bears repeating, perfectly safe loads of well under maximum pressure, can and will damage the Garand's op rod if the burn rate is too slow. Go to 4895 or 4064, or something no slower on the burn rate charts, and no slower. Dittos on the comments about bullet weight. I'd recommend 175s as being best suited, but certainly nothing heavier than the 180s.. The old style Sierra 180s (longer boat tail, like the 190s) were really great, but then they changed the bullet and put the standard 168 BT on it to economize on tooling. Stick with the 175 today, as it's a far better option for this rifle.

    Truly great rifles, and a fine history behind them, but they do have special care and feeding requirements!

    Kevin Thomas
    Lapua USA
     
  7. RugerNo1shooter

    RugerNo1shooter Active Member

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Thank you all very much for your input. I believe the powder I will use will be the IMR4895.

    I don't have any 175gr pills at the moment but I do have a decent number of 165 and 168's so I will probably try those first.

    I will search out some 175gr pills as soon as I can.

    Currently I am waiting on my follower arm to arrive as I was informed that it was bent on my rifle.

    It doesn't look bent but I'll have to compare it to the new one.

    Thanks again
    Pat
     
  8. RockyMtnMT

    RockyMtnMT Official LRH Sponsor

    Messages:
    3,029
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Hey guys,

    Any thoughts on using imr4031 with 150g bullets? Have a bunch of both and was planning on using in the Garand.

    Thanks,

    Steve
     
  9. Kevin Thomas

    Kevin Thomas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,256
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Never good to assume, but I assume that's IMR 3031, and not 4831? You wrote 4031. If it's IMR 3031, that'd work with the 150s, but I really hate throwing 3031. Major pain in the butt through most measures. The 4895 is the standard powder that was used for years by the Army ammunition plants, such as Lake City. Hard to improve on that, especially since it throws so much more smoothly.

    If that's what you've got on hand and want to use it up, no, the IMR 3031 shouldn't hurt anything.

    Kevin Thomas
    Lapua USA
     
  10. RockyMtnMT

    RockyMtnMT Official LRH Sponsor

    Messages:
    3,029
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Thanks Kevin,

    Yes it is 3031, my typo. I'm ok with not throwing the powder, I trickle most of the time anyway. I have a hard time trusting the powder measure.

    Steve
     
  11. Kevin Thomas

    Kevin Thomas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,256
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    You're good to go, Steve!

    Kevin
     
  12. Bart B

    Bart B Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,483
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    The .30-06 and its powders are an interesting trail to follow. Much of it has to do with how arsenals loaded a few dozen (trillion?) rounds for military use.

    When the Garand came to power in the late 1930's, DuPont and Hercules had finally devoped some good powders and they were first used in the .30-06 for Garands. It wasn't until 1941 that DuPont's IMR series had their 4895 powder added to others developed about 10 years earlier. That was "the" ticket for best pressure, velocity and accuracy specs for the new 150-gr. FMJ flat based bullet that earlier replaced the old 172-gr. FMJBT bullet which was the standard since the late 1920's. Prior to IMR4895, Hercules' Hi Vel No. 2 was the favorite for the .30-06 in competition in spite of being very erosive on barrels. But a new M1903A3 barrel could be bought from the DCM for 2 or 3 dollars which happened every 1000 to 1500 shots. Custom barrels for Springfields and Winchesters cost more, but such was life back then.

    Either Townsend or Whelen had proved that IMR4064 powder, when weighed to exact weights, shot the old 172-gr. FMJBT bullet in 30 caliber match ammo more accurate, it didn't meter uniformly enough in high-speed powder measures used on production lines. I've read that 4064 also shot the new 150-gr. bullet more accurate.

    Handloaders in the late '30's who won the matches and set the records with their old M1903A3 Springfields, Winchester Model 54's and the new Model 70 National Match rifles used IMR4064. They didn't mind having to weigh charges as no measure would throw them with less than a 2/10ths grain spread. Accuracy was the name of their game for both bolt guns and later on the early 1950's, Garands. And 4064 remained the powder of choice through the early 1960's when the .308 Win. dealt the death knoll to the .30-06 for serious competition for both rifle types. The single exception was when Sierra's 200 grain FMJBT match bullet was used; it was pushed out with IMR4350 by those wanting best accuracy with the .30-06 in bolt guns.

    Garands didn't use bullets heavier than 180 grains and 4064 was the favorite for best accuracy. But Frankfort and Lake City Arsenals continued using IMR4895 in their match ammo. One exception was the USN and USAF Garands rebarreled to 7.62 NATO; they used Sierra 190's atop 44 grains of IMR4320 which produced accuracy virtually as good as the best bolt action rifles could muster.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2010