Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

LC 68 M2 ball--slow

Ambrose
I acquired a pretty good quantity of the above ammunition. At the range, yesterday, I fired 5-shot groups from a Smith Corona 1903-A3, a SA M1, and a HRA M1--2 groups from each rifle. The average chronograph speed for the 30 shots was 2571 fps and groups were poor, averaging 4 1/4". Extreme spread was poor, also, with some 5-shot strings 158 fps from low to high. I fired some of the CMP Greek ammunition at the same session from all three rifles and groups with it ran about 2 1/2" and velocity hovered around 2700 fps so I'm sure it was not a chronograph issue. Also, while the SA M1 fed and ejected OK including the last shot, there was not enough energy to lock the bolt completely back and eject the clip. Today, I pulled down 10 cartridges and weighed the powder. The weight varied from 44.2 to 45 grains of a powder that resembled 4895 in grain structure. This stuff has not been reloaded--cases are new on the inside, primers are crimped in and sealed, the bullet sealant is in place.

My question is: Was there any reason to down-load GI .30/06 ammunition in the Vietnam War era? 44 to 45 gr. of powder seems awfully low. According to Hatcher, the WWII stuff was loaded with 50 +/- gr. of 4895. I have some LC 53 stuff that shoots to spec.; I'll have to pull some of that down and check it.
0

Comments

10 comments

Date Votes
  • nmyers
    There was no reason to download M2 ball during the Viet Nam era. The only reason production resumed was because of the need for machine gun ammo. Could be that after the Korean War the original powder supplier was no longer available, & they had to make a switch.

    Neal
    0
  • XXCross
    Depending on how this ammunition has been stored over the years, the propellant may have begun to degrade. Heat and moisture are not your friend.
    0
  • Tailgunner1954
    The amount of powder used varied from powder lot to powder lot (it ain't all the same folks). Normal L-L variation, is in the range of +/- 10% from nominal charge weight.

    When Bruce Hodgden started out, all his powder was blended surplus lots
    0
  • givette
    quote:Originally posted by Tailgunner1954
    The amount of powder used varied from powder lot to powder lot (it ain't all the same folks). Normal L-L variation, is in the range of +/- 10% from nominal charge weight.

    When Bruce Hodgden started out, all his powder was blended surplus lots

    Agreed. And it was done on purpose. Each lot was tested for velocity prior to loading, and adjusted to meet velocity requirements as determined by specification for [a particular cartridge].

    And I have Ball M2 that shows evidence of the bullets having been pulled. It's the '70's LC stuff. Bullet ogives show minute 'rub' marks..if I've explained it correctly. Maybe de-linked MG ammo?

    Didn't I hear something about MILSURP ammo being pulled to get around some type of ban on distribution to the general public? Not sure of this. Thanks, Joe
    0
  • perry shooter
    Poor storage conditions
    0
  • rusty3040
    powder is more than likely cmr 100, not 4895
    0
  • MIKE WISKEY
    quote:Originally posted by MIKE WISKEY
    Well, seeings as I have my Oehler set up for another test I ran some .30/06 ball over the screens to see what the vel. of variouse m-2 loading came in at. (5 rounds each) (26" target barrel)
    head stamp ......... vel........s.d........
    HXP.................2901.........26........greek
    LC 72...............2840.........23........delinked m.g. ammo
    LC 69...............2702.........32........boxed
    LC 69...............2623..........3........from 8 rd. clips
    SL 55...............2558.........36........from 5 rd clips
    0
  • mark christian
    quote:Originally posted by rusty3040
    powder is more than likely cmr 100, not 4895


    I agree. NATO spec .30-06 M2 Ball was loaded with with 45grs of CMR-100 propellant.
    0
  • Ambrose
    I have a few LC53 cartridges and pulled the bullets to check the powder charge: It ranged from 49.2 to 49.8 of a powder that (again) resembled 4895. From shooting some of these last fall over my Oehler, they clocked 2783 fps from a Garand. Even taking into account the possibility of poor storage, the LC68 ammo seems awfully slow. Ah well, another of life's mysteries!
    0
  • jonk
    Well there are 3 possibilities.

    1. It was pull down ammo that was reloaded with original components to get around the import restrictions. If so, the reloader might have used a tad less powder to stretch his supply or for a safety margin.

    2. Poor storage. If this was the case, I'd think you'd see corroded cases and/or degraded powder (rusty color, strong smell).

    3. An 'off' lot in terms of manufacturing. Possible, but if it was that far off spec I doubt the military would have accepted it.

    To me accuracy is king, and if it shot a good group I'd be ok with it; however often a lower load won't group as well so if it doesn't, I'd be a bit steamed. One possibility is for you to pull it down and work up a load watching for pressure signs until you hit your desired velocity. My only concern with that would be that if it was some funky powder, you could overpower the M1s gas system. Doubtful, but possible.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity