Garand Ammunition

[kar66]

I agree with what Jim just said. I remember my first Garand it not only had a "welded" but also a welded barrel. That was in the late 70s. I shot any 30-06 I could get. Back then we didn't know better "no internet". Funny thing that it shot very well and was as accurate as any Garand I have ever shot. However after I found out about the barrel I never shot it again. I parted it out. I still have the barrel and "gave" the receiver to a friend that wanted to build a M1 with parts he had. I even installed his barrel for him I told him what the receiver was that was OK with him.

[JohnW.]

I am glad that my our (Jeremy Cheek and moi) article in the GCA is being read and discussed.. I think that if anyone actually reads the article, they will find that it is well documented (and thanks to Mr. Seijas for allowing us to write and publish the piece). And yes, this was in response to the previous article which repeated almost all of the misinformation you see on the net. BTW, the editors of the GCA Journal were "tough but fair" and the editing process made the piece even better. For example, when I wrote that "many soldiers preferred AP over ball in combat" the editors made us go find some documentation to support this. What we found was a 1945 ARMY publication that said exactly this.. etc.

I welcome anyone's different opinions, but hopefully AFTER they have read the article.

Oh yeah, if you go BACK to 2009 (and WAY before on Jousters) (and on CMP) you will find that I have been preaching against the "myth" of M2 Ball for about ...

20+ years.

..And not even once since at least 1997-98 beginning with Jousters has ANYONE come up with one of these "bent" (damaged) operating rods.

As for Mr. Fisher. If the Editors of GCA hold him to the same verification and sourcing standards as they held Jeremy and me to, then this upcoming article might be worth a read (or just as likely another rebuttal piece).

[browningautorifle]

I like Kar66 speak of back to the '70's...when I bought my first M1, a nice LL SA 328219 that had a round firing pin. That too I shot until I read and felt it prudent to avoid a possible failure. At least there was some sort of evidence on that one...

[JohnW.]

Round firing pin is a legitimate safety issue (if it breaks). Shooting good quality commercial ammo isn't EVER a "dangerous" thing to do.

[browningautorifle]

Round firing pin is a legitimate safety issue (if it breaks).

Yes, that had pictures accompanying. I just couldn't imagine why there was a nice new firing pin with the rifle and a worn one in it, I was only about 19 then. It took some years to find out why. There's a picture in Pyle's book about the gas trap showing a gas trap that was found in the rafters of a barracks in Hawaii after the attack. All these years later it was fired and the round firing pin broke, detonating it.

[CalTex]

@ JohnW, I completely agree with your GCA article that there is no problem shooting standard commercial ammo in a Garand. I often did it before I “learned” you were only supposed to shoot M2 (or much heavier M2 AP or M1…) and I never had a problem. The fact that there is such a wide range of “allowable” loadings definitely supports your conclusion.

Just one comment on the article that you and the editors may have missed: you state the reason M2 increased from to 152 grains vs. 150 in the ’06 was due to the newer gliding metal jacket. This is not the case. Per Hatcher’s notebook, page 29 of my copy, there was a scarcity of tin and antimony during WWII. So recycled lead (mostly from car batteries) was used for the core instead of the original lead alloy, increasing the weight slightly.