M-2 load duplication - 150 FMJ

Greetings all,
After reviewing as many old thread posts as I can, I can not find load data on M-2 ammo as used in the M-1 Garrand. Have pulled a bunch of 150 grain FMJ's from very old military brass and would like to reassemble. Many of the prior stuff failed to fire. I learned upon disassembly that the quality control in this batch was non-existent. Some were very tight compressed loads, some were filled to the bottom of the neck. Pulling the bullets with a Foster bullet puller, some popped like a bottle of Champaign, some slipped freely, some were sealed and "glued in place". Most were of the 1942 to 1944 vintage.

Any comments will be appreciated. Likely powders to be used are either IMR 4895 or IMR 4064. Standard LRP will be used after removing the military crimp.

Ultimately I just want to shoot the rifle to the sights as they were designed for the M-2 ammo.

Thanks, 725

https://hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploa...-load-data.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20000620...rpo/M1load.htm

IIRC the original load was with 4895 at 2800fps.

thanks, all. I'm set now.

"Ultimately I just want to shoot the rifle to the sights as they were designed for the M-2 ammo."

The sights on the M1 Rifle were not designed or regulated for M2 ammunition. The sights were designed and regulated for M1 ammunition, the 174 gr FMJBT at 2640 fps.

M2 ammunition was requested by the National Guard in '39 [the NG had been fully mobilized by then] because M1 Ammunition out of M1s and M1903s exceeded the safety fans of most NG ranges in use. The original specification for M2 ammunition was to replicate M1906 30 cal ammunition [2700 fps]. It was found even with that M2 ammunition the range safety fans of many NG ranges were still being exceeded. Thus a further requested reduced the velocity of most M2 ammunition to 2450 - 2550 fps. Most of that level of substandard ammunition is what we fought WWII and even most of of Korea with. The 3rd level specification of M2 ammunition was for 2800+ fps so the bullet would be regulated to the M1s sight ranges. Very little of it was actually loaded by our arsenals as we were transitioning to the 7.62 NATO. The substandard level of M2 [2450-2550 fps] of M2 was loaded up through the late '60s for use in Viet Nam.

For SOME reason, I had "152 gr. flat-based FMJ @ 2750 f/s" branded into my brain, for M-2 ball, but I'll defer to Larry Gibson's description. I'm pretty sure he has the documentation to back it up.
One load I keep wanting to try in MY Garand is the 155 gr. Sierra BTHP, with IMR-4064. Hodgdon lists 49.0/IMR-4064 as giving 2811 f/s with this projectile. I'd bet that 48.5/IMR-4064/155 gr. BTHP would give ~2750 f/s, and cut my old rifle a little slack. I'd think it would also be a close approximation of the spec that apparently came to me in my dreams(?) about the M2 load.

Wow. How little I know. Thank you so much for the tutorial. The Ordnance Corps strikes again. Multiple iterations with the same label. I disassembled a bandoleer of en bloc clips and some of the ammo was filled with powder so compressed that when the bullet was pulled it popped like a bottle of Champaign. Others had a powder level below the shoulder. And almost everything in between. All were extruded powder and just a few - ball powder. Will take the information and grateful for it.
Anybody ever read "Misfire". History about the Ordnance Corps. Worth the read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry Gibson

"Ultimately I just want to shoot the rifle to the sights as they were designed for the M-2 ammo."

The sights on the M1 Rifle were not designed or regulated for M2 ammunition. The sights were designed and regulated for M1 ammunition, the 174 gr FMJBT at 2640 fps.

M2 ammunition was requested by the National Guard in '39 [the NG had been fully mobilized by then] because M1 Ammunition out of M1s and M1903s exceeded the safety fans of most NG ranges in use. The original specification for M2 ammunition was to replicate M1906 30 cal ammunition [2700 fps]. It was found even with that M2 ammunition the range safety fans of many NG ranges were still being exceeded. Thus a further requested reduced the velocity of most M2 ammunition to 2450 - 2550 fps. Most of that level of substandard ammunition is what we fought WWII and even most of of Korea with. The 3rd level specification of M2 ammunition was for 2800+ fps so the bullet would be regulated to the M1s sight ranges. Very little of it was actually loaded by our arsenals as we were transitioning to the 7.62 NATO. The substandard level of M2 [2450-2550 fps] of M2 was loaded up through the late '60s for use in Viet Nam.

---

The Seara 175gr HPBT shoots similar to the FMJ ball 174gr, IMHO the FMJ 174gr shoots more accurate. If I remember correctly at about 2700 FPS. In either the M1Grand or the M14 ( M1A )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry Gibson

M2 ammunition was requested by the National Guard in '39 [the NG had been fully mobilized by then] because M1 Ammunition out of M1s and M1903s exceeded the safety fans of most NG ranges in use. The original specification for M2 ammunition was to replicate M1906 30 cal ammunition [2700 fps]. It was found even with that M2 ammunition the range safety fans of many NG ranges were still being exceeded. Thus a further requested reduced the velocity of most M2 ammunition to 2450 - 2550 fps. Most of that level of substandard ammunition is what we fought WWII and even most of of Korea with. The 3rd level specification of M2 ammunition was for 2800+ fps so the bullet would be regulated to the M1s sight ranges. Very little of it was actually loaded by our arsenals as we were transitioning to the 7.62 NATO. The substandard level of M2 [2450-2550 fps] of M2 was loaded up through the late '60s for use in Viet Nam.

---

Thanks I was not aware of all the details.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/popul...n-before-wwii/

https://military-history.fandom.com/...machine%20guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLAHUT

The Seara 175gr HPBT shoots similar to the FMJ ball 174gr, IMHO the FMJ 174gr shoots more accurate. If I remember correctly at about 2700 FPS. In either the M1Grand or the M14 ( M1A )

---

Service rifle competitors have been mexican matching GI 7.62 M118 Special Ball and GI 30/06 M72 match ammunition and replacing its 173 FMJ's since Sierra introduced the 168 Match Kings in the early 60's. I would guess it's been done longer than that.

When the 175 SMK's became available most switched since the 175 SMK since they are a better 1,000 yard bullet than the 168 SMK. The 175 SMK's stay supersonic at a 1,000 yards out of an M-14.

The GI 173 FMJ's don't come close to Sierra Match King's in accuracy with one exception. Before M118 Long Range became available M852 was the king of GI issued match ammunition with its 168 grain Sierra Match King's. The issue was accuracy fell apart with the 168's out of M-14's once the bullet became subsonic around 850 or 900 yards so it was common for M-14 shooters to use standard M118 special ball with is 173 FMJ's for 1,000 yards since it remained supersonic.

I've fired a lot of M118 special ball and M72 match building/testing/competing with service rifles and match rifles. GI 173's don't hold a candle to M852, M118 Long Range or M72 mexican match with 168 or 175 Sierra Match kings.

https://snipercentral.com/history-m118-ammunition/
These various military types met at a symposium and agreed that something had to change and it was widely accepted that what was referred to as “Mexican Match” ammunition was a far better ammunition than M118 Match ammo. ‘Mexican Match’ was made by using military 7.62 brass and loading it with the Sierra 168gr Match King bullet. The name ‘Mexican Match’ reportedly came about because the first time this load was used was during the PanAm games in Mexico City. The accuracy improvement over the M118 Match ammo was remarkable, often shooting as much as 50% tighter groups. Because of these results a new load was developed called the M852. The design was simple, put the 168gr Sierra Match King bullet on the same M118 brass and powder. The M852 was adopted in the early 1980’s and was for match use only. Because the Sierra Match King (SMK) bullet had a hollowtip as a byproduct of production, it was not regarded at the time as being acceptable for combat use in terms of abiding by the Laws of Land Warfare. Since the M852 was the new match load for competition use, the M118 was redesignated the M118 ‘Special Ball’, or SB, and was the authorized ammo for combat use by snipers. Unfortunately, the performance of the M118 ammo had not improved as nothing had changed beyond the name. In the early 1990’s the M852 was approved for combat use but the wheels of progress were already turning on something new.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting...-yards.133250/
A little extra info here that may help to fill in a few blanks. The M852 load originally came about as a result of military shooters using "Mexican Match" ammo in their M14s for across the course competition(200, 300 and 600 yards). The practice was to pull the 173 grain FMJ bullets from issue M118 Match ammo, and simply replace it with the 168 SMK. We used to have "reloading parties" detailed to do this, and the resulting ammo was what we used in competition. The term came about when the military shooters used this in the Pan Am games held in Mexico City back in the mid 1960s. The name stuck, and it had been called Mexican Match ever since. This simple substitution (the 168 HPBT for the 173 FMJ)decreased group sizes something on the order of 30% or more, with no other changes. Major accuracy improvement there. In one of those rare displays of common sense, when Lake City got wind of shooters doing this, there was a proposal to simply make the ammo as the "customers" wished; loaded with a 168 SMK from the outset. That's how the M852 was born. Originally designated as a Match round, and clearly marked as "Not for Combat Use", the cases were further marked with a knurl around the head of the case, just in front of the extractor groove. Lousy place to put it, too, since it made reloading these cases highly suspect. The M118 Match ammo was redesignated as M118 Special Ball, and was virtually identical to the original M118 round, but in a different, more plain white box. Using the same 173 grain FMJ, this was ther round intended for combat use. In the very late '80s or early '90s, Col Hays Parks, then Chief of International Law with JAG issued a ruling that, based on work done by Col Marty Fackler, MD (who was then chief of the Army's Wound Ballistics Lab at Letterman)the HPBT (OTM) Match Bullets performed no differently (in terminal performance, upon impact)than did the FMJs, and were therefore not a violation of the Hague Accords. In other words, they were suitable for use in combat. The problem was that the 168 grain/M852 load didn't perform well at 1,000 yards, and the M118 Ball round did. The problem with these was the fact that they weren't as accurate as the HPBT Match bullets. There was a quick redevelpoment for Lake City, which resulted in the current 175 grain HPBT Match bullet. This delivered the accuracy of the 168, while giving the long-range ballistics of the 173 grain FMJ; the best of both worlds. The result was redesignated as the M118LR (LR standing for "Long Range")that continues to serve today. Perfectly legal for use in warfare, and as accurate as the M852, it replaced both the M118SB AND the M852, both of which have now been out of production for many years.

Hornady published a nice small pamphlet with loads just for service rifles. They were handing them out at Perry several years ago. You might want to contact them for a copy.

Much like Larry, this old shooter uses a 175 grain BT in his 1903A3 2 groove barrel. I bought this rifle from an old match shooter around 2004 and the first 3 shot out of it were a 3 hole gloverleaf with 2 overlapping and one so close you had to look close to see it wasn't touching also. I was in love right then and there. That was with a load of IMR4350 and listed around 2750fps in the manual. For some reason it has been hard to find 175 grains bullets around here in gun shops. It also does very well with 168 grain BTmatch with Hornady or Sierre. I haven't tried it with the Speer bullet yet but I may try it also. I shoot off a bench a lot anymore as at 81 yrs. young, I tremble a lot and have a hard time off hand. I can still murder 12oz. plastic drink bottle off hand at 100 yards if I take my time. My eyes are dim and my hands are shakey but I still have fun when I get a chance. my experience anyway, james

You guys are too much. This info is fantastic. Thank you all so much. I love the history. I love the story development. I've got some more reading to do.

I'm going to load with SMK 168, as I have a few of those. I'll save the 150 pulls for something else.

A good article to get is:

Reloading for the M1 Rifle, by John R Clarke. American Rifleman March 1986

If you'd like a paper copy, send me a PM and I'll get one in the mail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeonardC

A good article to get is:

Reloading for the M1 Rifle, by John R Clarke. American Rifleman March 1986

If you'd like a paper copy, send me a PM and I'll get one in the mail.

---

Thanks for the reference. A pdf of the paper can be downloaded at: http://www.veritasresearchconsulting...ohnRClarke.pdf

I liked the article because it provides for M1 Garand loads including using IMR-4895 and Win-748 with the 150 Grain; which many will have on their powder shelves. Also has loads for the 168 Grain in the M1 Garand, once again listing IMR-4895, H-4895, and Win-748 (as well as other powders.