Mind are all in .30-06. But I would really like one in 7mm-08. Saw on decades ago at the LGS with a heavy Krieger barrel. Went back a few days later but it was gone.
Mind are all in .30-06. But I would really like one in 7mm-08. Saw on decades ago at the LGS with a heavy Krieger barrel. Went back a few days later but it was gone.
I have several M1s that include both 308 and 30.06 calibers.
The 308 is a nice shooting round in the Garand and plenty accurate.
My preference is 30.06 - something just feels right about it.
Sometimes I think it would be fun to introduce a Garand chambered in the original concept .276 Pederson cartridge that McArthur as Army Chief of Staff rejected.
The .276" caliber cartridge was introduced for the testing of trial guns in 1923. The .30" '06 caliber cartridge, used so effectively in long range machine gun tactics, had previously been an infantry cartridge, too. Some army officers thought that a rifle of less caliber, using a lighter cartridge, might offer advantages allowing more cartridges to be carried.
Here can be seen the .276" caliber cartridge next to the .30" '06 caliber cartridge on the right of the photo. The .30" '06 caliber cartridge is shown above them in a five-round clip as used in the US M1903 rifle. To the left is the .276" caliber cartridge in a ten-round charger used in the Pedersen T1 rifle.
Derived from: https://www.nps.gov/spar/learn/histo...n-pedersen.htm
Mustang
"In the beginning... the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain.
You have to remember that in the 1930's, the nation was in the thros of a major depression of the economy. I am not a particular MacArthur fan but he did have some valid reasons for insisting on 30-06 for the Garand. 1: The Army had untold millions of rounds of 30-06 left over from WW 1 still in arsenals around the country. 2: The logistics of trying to maintain 2 inventories to a battlefield is a nightmare for supply. 3: The 06 had already proven itself against bunkers, pill boxes, and light armor and the .276 would have to go through that process, delaying its deployment. 4: The model 1917 machinegun was in 30-06 and would have to be changed over to the .276 round and that would take more time and more money. Given a different time and the money to make the changes, I think there was a good chance that the changeover would have taken place. Some people tout the idea that recoil would have been much less in the .276 but I don't see that at all. Less recoil, yes. Significantly less, no. That is like saying that the .270 Winchester or .280 Remington have far less recoil than the 30-06, it just ain't true. In my youth I thought MacArthur was just being an "old foggie" and not keeping up with the times but looking back on history I can see he had some good and valid reasons not to make a change given the time frame he had to make a decision. He got out generaled in the Phillippians but not in this decision. If I could have been there and had a voice, I would have insisted that the Garand use the same clip as the 30-06 BAR--now that would have been a real game changer. With that kind of firepower, you may have been able to do away with the BAR altogether. Can you just imagine what a difference that added firepowder could have made for a company of Marines on Guadalcanal or other Pacific islands during the Japanese suicide charge. Not to mention in Korea when the Chinese used mass attacks, usually launched at night. On a more personal note, I still think that the 30-06 is one of the 5 great cartridges ever developed and may be the best. my .02 anyway, james
I like your thinking and analysis.
But; my tinkering Gene still kicks in with "It would be interesting to see a Garand offered in .276 Pederson". Not going to happen; but look at all the Ballistic Equals and slightly less/greater to the 30-06 that have been released over the last 120 years.
Mustang
"In the beginning... the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain.
Mustang, not downplaying your wanting to experiment with another caliber in the Garand. I often wondered why a lighter version of it was not bought out by someone in calibers like .243 Win., 6.5x55, or .257 Roberts. Use a shortened gas takeoff system similiar to the M14, and a slightly dimensioned receiver and it would be handy. I liked the Winchester Model 100 until the firing pin problems and bolts showed up. It could have been corrected to start with but Winchester being Winchester would not even admit they had a problem for a bit. It was a really nice handling rifle and my Father had one. It would double on every trigger pull. but the 2 shots would be almost touching one another, kinda like snake eyes. james
To make a replica .276 Pederson cartridge, you'd basically have to take a 220 Swift, 6.5 Arisaka or 35 Remington case and reneck it to .270" as they don't commercially make the cartridge anymore. Not sure if anyone makes the dies anymore either.
That said...I own a M1 Garand with a Barnett Barrel in 7x57 Mauser. It has a gas port the same diameter as a 308 Win Garand barrel (I know as I cut it) and I use a Schuster Adjustable Gas Port Plug. I can use commercial/surplus or reloaded 7x57 with no issues for deer hunting or ranges under 300 yards with 140gr bullets or I can open up the port a little to match .308 Win pressure levels and use 7-08 reload data with 150/180gr jacketed bullets for the long range 600 yard firing line in NRA Rifle Matches.
I have not yet developed a consistent cast load for this rifle but perhaps I may before I give the rifle to one of my sons.
Bruce
I Cast my Boolits, Therefore I am Happy.
Bona Fide member of the Jeff Brown Hunt Club
A friend of mine, who is both a WW2 combat Marine and a Distinguished Rifleman says the M1 Garand was designed for the 308 Winchester, they just hadn't developed the cartridge for it, yet.................
Think about what you want to do with it.
The thinking when I started shooting Service Rifle was that the M1 was a bit more accurate than the M14, and the 7.62x51 cartridge was slightly more accurate than the .30-'06, so you might get a bit more accuracy with a M1 in 7.62.
I've worn out two .30 and two 7.62 barrels on M1 rifles, and never had an out-of-battery problem, but I have read that it happens more on 7.62 caliber M1 rifles.
If you want to shoot in Garand matches, it has to be in .30 or you get put in a separate class.
I have a lot more .30-'06 brass, so it makes more sense for me to go that direction.
i've got a good idea. how about 30-06.
30/06 all the way!
I have seen one mentioned on another forum in 6.5x55 Swiss.
ukrifleman
I have one in 308
I have one in 3006
I have one in 35 Whelen
if I could get a barrel for the next one 358 Win 16 twist I would be over the moon
Why doesnt ruger take the mini 14, redesign it as a scaled down M1 and make the clips shoot 8 rounds of 556???? Any takers???
If they had designed it to be as accurate as my M1 then I might be interested. Heck, I'd probably already have one
My vote is the trusty -06, more because it’s what it was made for but a 6.5x55 would be awesome.
BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
GC | Gas Check |