Opportunity to get a Garand

WOW !!! never thought i would get the opportunity to own one of these. buddy-o-mine is a gunsmith and this one looks and shoots real nice. from appx '40/'41 no dents or dings and its ready to go. Question...... i already have a m77 in '06 and have successfully reloaded for that, including the so-called "light loads" for this old weenie. but with the garand i know the loads have to be back up there for it to function properly. how much higher ? those of you reloading for this venerable war horse, any quirks i should suspect or know about? would use it occassionally just to get the nostalgia out of it. would plink, target shoot, but not serious enough to call it match competition. figuring on staying around 150-165 gr bullets. the chance to own this piece of history......to see if it really was what ole blood & guts called the most important weapon of ww2, has me drooling once again, even though i swore i would never go back to full loads again. what do you all think....should i go for this ?????? Thanks

oh...by the way.... i really don't have to much LC brass. is it/would it be a problem using rem/win/fed brass ?

The time tested axiom for reloading for the Garand is: no powder faster than IMR3031 or slower than IMR4320, and no bullet heavier than 180 grains. The various 4895 powders are near ideal, and with 150-165gr bullets, 47.0 - 47.5gr is where you want to be. No problem using commercial brass.

Don

Commercial brass works just fine. It just gets beat up a little faster. As said above the 4895 powders are ideal, and pills from 147 gr. to 173 gr. :thup:

The topic of powder burn rates for Garands, and posts like USSR's stating a rule of thumb, no powder slower than IMR 4320 etc, has in the past elicited discussion almost as heated as say, difference bet 7.62 & .308 (or 5.56 vs .223). Some reloaders will swear that IMR 4064 works great in Garands, with no adverse effect, perfectly appropriate. An occasional poster will claim that use of IMR 4064 will bend op rods, too slow. As I have stated here before, when I called Hodgdon one time, a technician told me to go no slower than H380. But even if safe, something like H380 is likely far from optimal for accuracy in most cases. Then there is the reminder that if you get an adjustable gas plug for the rifle, you can adjust it to allow use of many slow powders. There were also some applied science lessons posted here in the past showing the thermodynamics of burning powder complete with curves, graphs, relationships, etc.

For me, the rule of thumb repeated by USSR is fine, conservative, and safe, but I think IMR 4064 is certainly worthy of consideration and prob not unsafe. Other mileage, opinions, experiences may vary.

Sorry, but I looked at the wrong burn rate chart. MOST charts show IMR 4320 slower than IMR 4064, and as such IMR 4064 is within USSR's oft repeated rule of thumb. (However, another aspect of this discussion, burn rate charts are relative, and may vary from time to time and place to place.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beefyz

WOW !!! never thought i would get the opportunity to own one of these.

---

Don't take this the wrong way, but assuming you live in the United States, everyone has the opportunity to own an M1 Garand, shipped directly to your house.

CMP Sales

They are not as cheap as the once were (what is?) but still a good deal compared to what else is available out there, and you know it has been checked over and is safe to shoot.

By the way, the current Hornady book has specific load data for the M1, and does include IMR 4064, but not for 150 grain bullets, just for 168 and 178 grain bullets.