Garand battle zero ?

I have a question about battle zero for the garand. I do not plan to do competition type shooting.....mine will just be for fun at the range so I decided to go with a battle zero. Now, following Duff's instruction in his book I should run the elevation up from the bottom roughly 10 clicks and then at 25 yards zero for a POI that is a 1 1/4 above POA. Now here is where I am not sure of the next step.
I believe the next step is to loosen the elevation screw and adjust the knob before re tightening but just exactly which line on the drum should I align the range? the 100 yd or 200 yd or different.??? By the way, just so happens that at ten clicks up it aligns perfectly with the 100 yd mark already. Thanks in advance.

Goal: When you shoot at a known range (say 100 yds or 200 yds) the drum reads the range when you hit where you want. The use of distance above 25 yd zero is just to get you near. If necessary change drum until this works. Then you can dial in any known range. Note: if you are in a "competition" you will probably have to write down click adjustments to get you "right on" at various ranges. This is why NM rifles have smaller click adjustments, but that is another story.

With the sight reading right on the rifle range, there is a longer line with no numbers which is the "battle sight " distance. I believe this is ~300 yds. This will get you "close enough" for most quick shooting in a battle.

Rifle Marksmanship with the M1 Garand Rifle (1942)

Try this sticky post

In Basic Training at Ft. Dix in 1960 we were taught to perch the bull on the front sight blade like a pumpkin on a fencepost. The right zero was a 3-shot group on the edge of the bull at 6:00 o'clock. That sounds to me like the point of aim was the same as the point of impact at 25 yards.

When I went through boot camp at Parris Island in the mid 1950's we were instructed that "battle sights" were set at 13 clicks elevation and zero windage.

Thanks for the suggestions.

13 clicks was only a starting point, all rifles are different. Average elevation is 9-11 clicks and we started from there. One guy needed 28 clicks to get a zero, others went the other way and ended up at 2 or 3.

My Winchester is 18 clicks up.

I have a question for you guys along the lines of this thread topic. I'm just a casual shooter, doing my best to accurize my Garands as I go along. I picked up a CMP special grade Garand a while back from a friend of a friend; I haven't shot it yet. Here's the thing: The front sight is adjusted almost all the way to the right.

Can I re-center the front sight and somehow adjust the rear sights so I can line it up centered? How would I go about making the rear sight adjustments? Thanks again fellas.

The front sight is supposed to be centered. The rear ideally should be centered too for shooting but some are a bit off. If it's off by much then your barrel is out of index, that is not top dead center. This happened occasionally and can be corrected. The rear sight can of course be adjusted left and right for minor moves with the windage knob(on the right).

Thanks for the info. Right now I'm just assuming the rifle is shooting point of aim with the front sight aligned all the way to the right. I'm betting it didn't come that way from the CMP and that the previous owner had it dialed in. I'm afraid of the barrel being out of index, but this is all just speculation on my part until I can get out to the range, of course.

One more question. Suppose I center the front sight and then the rear sight then needs 5 click to the right to be centered on target, is there a way to make that adjustment the center on the windage dial?

The front sight was set at the factory, and John Garand intended that all adjustments should be made from the rear sight. That's why a sight seal covered the front screw in early M1s. Competitive shooters who know what the are doing, however, sometimes adjust the front sight if it is too far off center.

Mine was 12 clicks left of center for a NWZ. The barrel had to be reindexed and now it is 1 click of center for a NWZ. For 200 yards mine is 7 clicks up from the bottom shooting 110 grain Sierra HP's over 48 grains of Accurate 2495 and a CCI 200.

Dave

I have found they seem to be out of index quite regularly, the ones that came from the Danes anyway. Not really the US guns. I have the wrenches and dial indicator, I just do them myself now. It doesn't take long and you can check everything at once then.

Sandwiches and Pinot Noir for lunch on he porch today... Rochioli Chardonnay to start, then:

Calera Ryan
Maritnelli Lolita
WH Smith Hellenthal

Chocolates and 2003 Graham port for dessert... can I go to sleep now? the Hellenhal was the clear winner, rated it 96, but the loser got 94 :)

Well done that!

Bob,

Don't know the WH Smith. Years ago Dick Graff from Chalone (before the sell out) flew up to Eastern Washington and stayed with me. A really neat guy. The end result was the Canoe Ridge project. Unfortunately his life ended when he misjudged a landing at Chalone. Another Pinot I like is the Au Bon Climat from SB.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob seijas

13 clicks was only a starting point, all rifles are different. Average elevation is 9-11 clicks and we started from there. One guy needed 28 clicks to get a zero, others went the other way and ended up at 2 or 3.

---

True if you are firing the rifle for the first time on the rifle range. You could start with whatever it took to put a round on paper at a certain range. As far as the term
"Battle Sights", as I recall, that is the setting you use in a combat situation when the distance of the potential target is unknown. Take the article you wrote for the Summer 2012 GCA Journal about Hector Cafferata. In a "battle" such as Pvt. Cafferata found himself in, most of his shots were up close and personal. As Hector said " you just put the front sight on them, pulled the trigger, and down they went". No time to worry about changing sight settings. Long range shots would be left to snipers for the most part.

Exactly right, Joe. Battle Sight Zero was intended to allow the rifleman to engage "man-sized targets" at all ranges from 50 - 400 yards by aiming center mass. It's rough and certainly not designed for competitive precise shooting. It's called "Battle Sight" zero for a reason.

It seems that most Euro/Soviet rifles have the "Battle Sight" set at the lowest sight setting regardless of range. Some early Garand drums have an arrow for the "Battle Sight" setting (275 yards). As I see it, the problem is to make a rifle that is KISS and can be used by the least trained individual and one that has potential for those with more ability. The M1917/P14 "Enfield" had a good set up: ladder down = Battle Sight (~400 yards), up you could go from 200 to 2000 yards. No windage though, but I have found that unless you are NOT being shot at, Kentucky windage is the best. It could have also used a thicker front sight.

Dave

I have heard it said that the M1917/P14 was a better "battle" rifle than the M1903. I would tend to agree.

Don't forget that war was changing when Garand designed the rifle. Precise distance shooting from fixed positions was changing to fire-and-manuever mobility, so less precision and greater hit ability were key. The Marines had trouble accepting this at first, even declined to adopt the M1 in early 1940. Many old-school Army officers felt the same way.

Better is always a relative term. Nothing is slicker than the early Springfields, although having an adjustable peep sight so far from the eye goes counter to "Battle" principles IMHO. Cock on opening, cock on closing for me a toss up. The M1917/P14 seems larger and less user friendly. It seems that many WW1 GI's had "the English rifle" (to quote Sgt York). From what I have read, it was a great Sniper rifle. The SMLE was probably the best of the breed for what it was designed for: 10 shots, plenty of power, fast action, rugged and tolerant of mishandling and debris. A rimmed cartridge, while not the ultimate, did what it was supposed to do. Remember, artillery, air support, mines, machine guns etc. were the real killers. Only when it was Mano y Mano did the rifle make a difference.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wineman

It seems that many WW1 GI's had "the English rifle" (to quote Sgt York). From what I have read, it was a great Sniper rifle. The SMLE was probably the best of the breed for what it was designed for: 10 shots, plenty of power, fast action, rugged and tolerant of mishandling and debris. A rimmed cartridge, while not the ultimate, did what it was supposed to do. Remember, artillery, air support, mines, machine guns etc. were the real killers. Only when it was Mano y Mano did the rifle make a difference.

Dave

---

I was always under the impression that when Sgt. York referred to the "English rifle" he was talking of the M1917, which was really a P14 in 30-06. I really don't see many G.I.s using a rifle chambered for the British 303.

There's a thread on this already Joe...many moons ago...