• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

help with m1a loads.

shuamee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Messages
66
Location
georgia
i have a springfield m1a loaded im about to try to work up a load for. i read where alot of people say u can bend the op rod loading too hot for this gun and i def dont want to do that. im looking for a complete load as in bullet, primer, and powder for this. not lookin for a hunting round looking mainly for distance and accuracy out of this gun. i already know its not a tack driver and i didnt buy it with that intention i just want the gun to perform its best. i also know that all guns arent the same and what works for you may not work for me i just want a good starting point. i am always at work or workin on diesels on the side i really dont have too much time to spend on a load development right now. i havent done much loading for rifles mostly for pistols but even that was a few years ago. any help on this will be very greatly appreciated.
 
There's really no such thing as "working up a load" for an M1A/M14, or at least, certainly no point to it. You load up anywhere from 40.5 to 41.5 grains of 4985 (as Nomad suggests) seat a 168 on top and go to the range. If the gun doesn't shoot it well, you've got a gun problem. Back when the M1A was the Service Rifle for competition, you could have polled 100 shooters on the line and I'll guarantee you, 95 of them would be using this load. Of the other five, three were newcomers who just hadn't gotten the word yet, and two were the inveterate tinkerers who always think they can reinvent the wheel. Give 'em a few months, and they'll come back to the 4895 load like everyone else.

The op rod problem is more of a feature with M1s than M1As, but it's a valid concern from both. The problem is rarely one of using a load that's too hot, but of using the wrong powder. Frankly, you can have loads that generate dangerous pressures that would not damage an op rod if you were using a really fast powder. Conversely, you can have loads that are well within (or even under) the safe pressure limits for the 308 that WILL damage the op rod if the powder is too slow. The key is selecting a powder from the mid range burning speed, just like 4895. This powder was what the military used in their own ammo production for a great many years, and you simply cannot go wrong with it in an M14/M1A.

Beyond that, stick with bullets of no more than 175 grains, ALWAYS full length size, and make sure your primers are of a reasonably tough cup design and seated below the case head. Do that, and you may just be surprised at how well a properly built M1A can shoot.
 
thank yall alot for the replies ill try that site and figure up a load from what yall suggested. does anybody know what was in the lc macth ammo?
 
Last edited:
thank yall alot for the replies ill try that site and figure up a load from what yall suggested. does anybody know what was in the lc macth ammo?
Here's some links to 7.62 NATO match ammo history. Interesting data on loads and results based on what the best rifle shooters experienced:

The Rifleman's Journal: Cartridges: 7.62 NATO Long Range Match Cartridges - Part 1

The Rifleman's Journal: Cartridges: 7.62 NATO Long Range Match Cartridges - Part 2

The best part was this section of Part 2 about Federal's MK 316 ammo with IMR4064 powder:

. . . . when it was standardized as the MK316 Mod 0 cartridge, was a Federal modified case (Drawing number 8347636), Federal match primer, Sierra 175 grain Matchking and 41.75 grains of IMR 4064 powder. According to the published sources this load will produce a muzzle velocity of 2640 fps out of a 24 inch barrel. The load as produced by Federal is claimed to produce under 1 MOA out to 1000 yards from an appropriate rifle. With the IMR powder the shift in velocity is only 20 fps from 0 to 100 Deg C, with the Standard deviation in velocity over 40 rounds being 15 fps or less. In contrast the M118LR loaded with RE-15 powder will see a 50 fps rise in velocity for a 50 deg rise in temperature.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top