M1 garand cracked receiver

[bbman25]

so about.. 2 and a half months ago a buddy and i were shooting the garand at the range. we were shooting reloads that my grampa and i made, he is an experienced reloader and has been doing this since the 60s. i have a 1942 manufacture spiringfield garand. anyway, about 5 rounds in, i pulled the trigger and heard 2 rounds go off. there was only 7 cases on the ground, for a short time we couldnt even find the missing case or any evidence of it. when we did find it, the neck was all ballooned out, and the case looked like a giant .45. so we are assuming what had happened was the round went off as it was being chambered, and we have no idea why. luckily the bullet left the barrel and i only got minor powder burns on my neck..
as a result of the incident, the rear of the receiver cracked on both sides, and the op rod was bent slighty and will not close the bolt all the way unless i give it a good whack. the stock was also cracked, and a nice chunk came out of the back of it.
i have had some bad luck with the rifles, having just repaired the mauser stock for the 5th time a few weeks ago..

needless to say we were pretty ticked off about the whole thing, and now i am looking into either buying a new one or getting it repaired.

so, based on my friend's research, a receiver is about 250-300$, an op rod is 100-160$ a stock is about 70$ (mine is still usable so i may skip this one) along with my barrel looking pretty nasty inside with quite a bit of wear, so i think i need a new barrel as well- another 100 some dollars.

i could spend nearly 500$ to get the parts, then probably some more to get a gunsmith to do the work. or, i could put this one on the wall and try to find another rifle for about the same price or less.

any ideas? opinions? good places to check for parts or a new rifle? Id like to find one with a lower number like mine (which is in the 400k range), if that is possible for that low of a price. condition is not a major issue, as long as it works and isnt rusted away and obvioulsy very rough. my dad and i can clean up the metal and get it re-blued/parkerized at the shop.
I will add some pictures of the damage later today if anyone is interested in seeing.

[jaguarxk120]

Hang it on the wall and be thankfull tat nothing worse happened.
You won't find a gunsmith that will weld on a reciever for repairs anywhere.

[melchloboo]

Just order a new one from the Civilian Marksmanship Program, and salvage whatever parts you can from what you have.

[musher]

To avoid out of battery slam fires in your new Garand, make sure your reloads have the primers seated fully.

Many recommend not using federal primers in this rifle.

[Orlando]

Buy a Service Grade from CMP for $625, and part out what you can on your Garand

[bbman25]

here is an image of the cracks for anyone who is curious.

I guess i'll look into getting a new rifle then, thanks for the input. as for the primers not being fully seated, that's definitely a likely possibility, as we were having some trouble with the press that day.. I was hoping to try to find one for a little less than what the CMP has them listed, but if I can't then I'll just need to save up for another few weeks.

[gunsmokeTPF]

Stick with factory ammo next time.

[Willie Sutton]

Actually.... that receiver is not probably badly cracked enough to remove it from service. That's not a highly stressed area of the receiver... I am SURE that armchair experts will disagree (awaiting flames), but... those are pretty insignificant cracks from an impact load that is not what the receiver was designed for. Unless you repeat the error, and blow the thing up again, that receiver will not see any loading in those zones again. The receiver is not generally taking much if any load there in firing, compared to the forces at the front of the receiver. If it were mine.... I'd not scrap it "just yet".

To give more detail, that area is literally as far away from the locked area of the receiver as is possible. At the moment of firing, the bolt lugs are locked into the forward most area of the receiver... this is at the extreme rear.

I would do a dye penetrant inspection of the area, and document the dimensions of the cracks, and then shoot 100 rounds and re-inspect. if the cracks stay the same, shoot another 1000 rounds and re-inspect. If the cracks stay the same... forget about it. This is exactly how we would handle a crack in an aircraft engine casing. In fact, I suggest that you take the receiver to your local airport, find the A&P (airframe and powerplant mechanic) that works there, and ask him for help in doing the dye penetrant inspection. It's cheap, easy, and accurate. Cracks in aircraft engine casings are part and parcel of them... any A&P mechanic worth his salt will be able to assist you. A crack is not absolutely a "bad thing" as long as it does not change. Good documentation of the dimensions and monitoring for changes is a smart way to proceed. If a repair is something to consider, a SMALL tap of a TIG weld on the bottom of the receiver at each crack point, and then filing off and stoning to smooth the weld area flat would likely prevent any future migration of the crack in normal shooting.

Or you could buy a new one.... ;) By the sounds of it, this one has just about had it as far as being a shooter, and as others have opined, by the time you add an op rod, stock, and perhaps rebarrel it, you can replace it.

I'm looking for a cheap M1 receiver to build up a BM-59 project. Box it up and send it... I'm an A&P and I'll take my own advice and see how it shapes up.


Willie

.

[Dave P]

"That's not a highly stressed area of the receiver.."


Yes, I disagree. If it was a low stress area, how did it ever crack then???

It is the back of the receiver that is designed to stop the bolt and absorb the force (hitting it hard!) every time the rifle is fired.

[Willie Sutton]

The velocity of the bolt when it taps the back of the receiver with normal unlocking is... "very low" in comparison to the velocity it hit in this case.

But your point is well taken. "Low" is relative in comparison to the loads at the locking area up front, and is also "low" in the normal case as compared to this particular case in the rear of the receiver.

I will edit my previous post to more accurately reflect this, and continue the explaination below to hopefully avoid any errors. Thanks for the excellent point.

My bet is that the op rod was not connected to the bolt when this occured.. depending on how the rod bent it likely disengaged the cam. The back of the receiver then took all of the load... no op rig spring or the mass of the op rod to slow things down. The rear of the receiver is what prevented the bolt from entering the face of the shooter and exiting the back of his head. No kidding. Even if the op rod stayed attached, this was a VERY bad thing to have occured, see following:

Think about shooting an "unlocked BLOWBACK .30-06" rifle" v/s a "Locked until bullet passes gas port at end of BBL and then a delay while to op rod cams rotate the bolt, and then retard that with op rod spring and the mass of the op rod/bolt combination" rifle and my guess is that the forces at the rear of the receiver were likely an order of magnitude (10X) those normally seen there, or perhaps even more. Maybe 2 orders of magnitude (100X). It's a REALLY large difference.

Evidence: What we can surmise by the description of the recovered case is that the round was NEARLY chambered when this occured, otherwise the case would be ruptured and likely fully separated at the head. A fully unchambered premature would have developed low pressures. THIS thing developed what is likely nearly FULL pressure in the case. Blowback .30-06 with a LIGHT recoil spring being the only thing resisting the load? Yowie!! The MOST VULNERABLE point for a premature is JUST before the bolt begins to rotate to lock, IE: the round is "nearly" full chambered so it will develop full pressure, but nothing is holding the bolt locked. I would be interested to look at the bolt to see if there is any evidence of any locking... even a few degrees. None PLUS the evidence provided by the case shape = worst case from a stresses standpoint.

I'd still be inclined to play with it... but with the tools and techniques here to do this correctly at no cost other than labor. The OP probably does not have that facility. For HIM the best bet is likely to buy another service grade rifle. HERE I'd look it over more carefully and likely salvage it.


Willie


.

[musher]

Willie, you are correct that this area of the receiver isn't heavily loaded in normal operation. You're also correct in surmising that the crack may not spread in further normal operation.

The thing that troubles me about your analysis and recommendation is that if a similar malfunction were to occur when shooting the cracked receiver, it may well injure the shooter, perhaps seriously.

We see that the receiver absorbed substantial excess/misdirected energy in this malfunction, protecting the shooter from the rearward exit of the bolt. There's no reason to believe further cracking will be progressive rather than a total failure.

[Willie Sutton]

I respectfully disagree based on my experience with properties of metals, and the ease of preventing a similar malfunction. But please include the word "respectful" in the answer... I always also advise that each individual do what is the most conservative thing that THEY are comfortable with. My own comfort level would be met with that receiver. Others... not so. I respect that completely. And... if it were mine, and I completed a rifle using it... I'd probably not sell it to anyone for liability reasons. Safe? Absolutely. As safe as if new? Uhh... probably not. Shoot it? Absolutely. Argue with lawyers after someone else shoots soft primers in the thing and your worst fears are realized? Uhh... prefer not to.

Further advice: Stay away from soft primers, and if possible, shoot what it was designed to shoot: milspec ball ammo. "The only way to make something foolproof is to keep it away from fools". "Anything" can happen in theory. he chances of this happening a second time can be fully answered by shooting it correctly with what it was designed to shoot.

That's just me... actual mileage may vary. Caveat Emptor, etc.

Really: I'd gladly buy that receiver... I really do want a trial one to do a BM-59 build on. A Bit-O-TIG and a file and... well, you get the point.


Best,

Willie

.

[musher]

It's certainly true that everyone has to draw their own line. I'm not so sanguine about my ability to predict and prevent future malfunctions and there's no shortage of Garands in the world. I wouldn't shoot that receiver in its present state. Risk/reward from my perspective doesn't justify it.

Of course, I don't shoot low numbered Springfields either, so there you go.

I was responding more to your original suggestion the op take the receiver to an A&P and have the crack dp inspected, then shoot it in the cracked state while monitoring the crack growth. Suggesting that course to a third party is somewhat different than analyzing your own level of acceptable risk and taking the plunge yourself.

In your later post, I think you tried to clarify that you were withdrawing your suggestion that the OP to follow this course of action. While I wouldn't presume to deter anyone from taking their own educated chances on this, I did feel uncomfortable seeing someone advise a third party to do so.

[Willie Sutton]

I'd guess like so many skill-based things, if you want either "black" or "white" then it's a self fulfilling prophesy, as follows:

(1): Anyone needing the advice is not competent enought to use it independantly.

and

(2): Anyone proficient enough to do this themselves isn't seeking advice.


So... why bothering giving advice at all? :confused:



I offered what I offered under the premise that I am discussing it with someone who is "able to make their own choices" but could use some assistance as to the tools that are available to do so. Sort of a middle ground of "grey" between the two extremes above. I give some basic credit for basic intelligence and the ability to be educated to my fellow man. Actual mileage may vary... :rolleyes: Or in other words, Darwin sometimes DOES rule the roost.


I don't shoot low number '03's either BTW. I can't test them. I can test cracks.


Best,


Willie

.

[Orlando]

So what happens if you were to use the reciver that is cracked and you happen to get a hot load. It wouldnt be pretty.
Garand recivers can be bought from CMP for $195.00. It isnt worth the chance.
IMO it isnt anything more than a paperweight

[Harry Bonar]

Sir;
NEVER, NEVER, weld on any part of any rifle reciever!
Harry B.

[Willie Sutton]

Hmm: I'll bear that in mind next time I field strip any of a number of things that have welds on them.

Never saw any of the M-14 clones made from M1-A's with the selector lug welded on? That weld is in about the same area as these two tiny cracks are located. And before you moot it... none of them are re heat-treated after welding. You simply weld fast and keep the rest of the areas cool.

Or any of the M1 Garands made from two demilled receivers welded together?

Or any of the (Thompsons, Stens, Sterlings, MG-42's, MG-34's etc,. etc, etc) that have been rewatted?

It is not for the foolish... but it's not to be ruled out either. To each job the correct technique.



"So what happens if you were to use the reciver that is cracked and you happen to get a hot load"


Uhh... nothing at all. If you knew the Garand you would know that. "Hot Load" meaning 45 grains of Bullseye? If it'll blow this up,. it'll blow up your Model 70 too... But as I said, I expected a load of armchair experts to want to argue..... :o


Fact of the matter is that you could REMOVE all but the front TWO INCHES of a Garand receiver, chamber a round, lock the bolt into the bolt recesses, and fire it without an Op-Rod and you would be as safe as a baby in church. Hot loads or not... did you actually LOOK at where the cracks are, and do you actually UNDERSTAND how a Garand works?



Willie

.

[edward5759]

That is a repairable crack!
Before my stroke I welded hundreds of M1 Garand receivers and had no problems. I do re-harden the receivers after the weld. Even after I welded a rear lug on them. TIG weld would work for that.
The only thing you need to avoid is the porosity in the weld so run heavy argon with the weld.

[Orlando]

I will not get in a <pointless contest of ego> with you but I understand completly how the Garand works. I have owned 24 of them through the years and built several myself and have a few more ready to have barrels installed and assembled
I also never said the Garand would blow up
I do know that the bolt hits the heel when fired and having a cracked heel and someone possibly firing a round that is hot/not designed for the Garand along with a weak Op Rod spring and having the heel posibly come back in someones face is not something I would ever take a chance on.
If you are a gambler more power to you but telling anyone else its 100% safe is negligent.
My opinion, yours may vary

[Willie Sutton]

Got one guy here who's welded them... and another who says "Not Me"...

The difference between theory and practice is that in theory they are the same, but in practice they often differ.

I'll take the practical answer.


Best bet: TIG it and shoot it.

Possible bet: Measure, Monitor, and shoot.

Dumbed-down answer: Paperweight it.

Hoped for answer: "I'll send it to Willie and let him play with it"...

:rolleyes:


Enjoy,

Willie

.

[Orlando]

Try selling that rifle some day with welds, no one would touch it. I would bet you would have a real hard time finding any gunsmith that would take on the job because of liability
Garand recivers are easy to come by and not all that expensive
You have your way, I have mine

[Willie Sutton]

Really?

Thousands of welded up former dewat rifles are circulating and still selling.

Throw away an old soldier? Seems like a crime.

This isn't even close to the splicing of two cut off receivers that was a common practice in years gone by. I guess buying two dozen Garands does not bring with it history lesson of how Garands first came to be owned here by civilians. Hint: They were all spliced together from two halves long before there was TIG welding. Nope... they were just ordinary stick welds followed up with a surface grinder.


Willie


.

[P5 Guy]

Too little information.
bbman25, was this rifle from the CMP/DCM? What powder did the reloader use, how much and what weight bullet?

The receiver may have been a weld-up already? And lead dipping to anneal the heels of some receiver was a practice at Springfield during war production.
My personal opinion is that I treasure my boyish good looks too much to have them ruined by and exploding rifle.
As stated by some of the others. Salvage the undamaged parts and go to the CMP to buy a Field or Rack Grade M1.

[James K]

Well, some of those "cut and weld" receivers did crack at the welds, no matter what anyone says. The location of the weld meant that none (AFIAK) caused any injury or catastrophic failure of the receiver, but to say that none ever cracked is not true.

The receiver heel is not intended to stop op rod travel; that is done at the front of the receiver. The heel allows a place for the bolt to stop when play between the op rod and the bolt allows the bolt to keep moving after the op rod stops. Normally, there is little force applied at that point, but the heels did crack (just like that) when firing rifle grenades before they developed the valve type gas cylinder lock screw and the grenade launchers that open the valve. Subsequently, the heels of new receivers were annealed in molten lead, and some were annealed during rebuilds; probably that one was not treated.

I guess I am on the fence on this one. I agree that continued firing of the rifle is unlikely to cause any further problem, even if the cracks are not welded, and that welding them will do no harm. Yet, on general principles, I don't like the idea of continued use of that receiver unless absolutely necessary. It is not a matter of life or death, of needing the rifle to defend home and homeland, and there are other M1 rifles available at reasonable cost.

Jim

[Slamfire]

so about.. 2 and a half months ago a buddy and i were shooting the garand at the range. we were shooting reloads that my grampa and i made, he is an experienced reloader and has been doing this since the 60s. i have a 1942 manufacture spiringfield garand. anyway, about 5 rounds in, i pulled the trigger and heard 2 rounds go off. there was only 7 cases on the ground, for a short time we couldnt even find the missing case or any evidence of it. when we did find it, the neck was all ballooned out, and the case looked like a giant .45. so we are assuming what had happened was the round went off as it was being chambered, and we have no idea why. luckily the bullet left the barrel and i only got minor powder burns on my neck..

An experienced reloader and an experienced gas gunner reloader are two different things.

What you had is obviously an out of battery slamfire. That cartridge likely had a sensitive primer and it is highly probable that Grandpa’s reloads were too long or too fat.

The Garand has a free floating firing pin, like this M1 carbine. The M1 Carbine and the M1 Garand have a firing pin retraction cam. This cam pulls the firing pin back during extraction. It also has limited utility as a safety device, but is easily defeated by tight or long rounds. If your round was smaller than the chamber the odds would have been in your favor to have an in battery slamfire.

Only at final cam down is the firing pin retracted. Up to then the firing pin is totally free floating and tapping the heck out of the primer.

This is a M1 Carbine firing pin retraction cam.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/M1%20Carbine/DSCN1383FiringPinEngagingbridge.jpg

This is the M1 Garand firing pin retraction cam they are functionally identical, just the carbine is easier to visually understand.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/oob1b.jpg

These are M1 Garand receivers and the firing pin is fully forward and just touching the firing pin retraction cam. As you can see there is only thousand's of an inch of forward movement left in bolt cam down and yet the firing pin is out about 0.064" of the bolt face.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/ReducedSCN6746HRReceivershowingbrid.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/ReducedDSCN6749IHCReceivershowingbr.jpg

This is most likely where your sensitive primer went off. Before lug engagement.

If the bolt has to stop here to crunch fit a long case or a fat case that firing pin is rebounding off the back of the primer at its highest velocity in its forward travel.

That is why it is important to small base size cases used in these rifles and to set up the dies with a case gage and size to gage minimum. This will reduce the risk of an out of battery slamfire.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Reloading/ReducedWilsongagemeasuringnew308bra.jpg

I am curious to know if Grandpa used federal primers. Federal primers are the most sensitive primer on the market and the most "slamfiring" primer in Garands.

For these rifles it is safety critical to ream primer pockets to depth, seat the primers by hand, and verify that all of the primers are below the primer pocket. There is a chance that a cocked primer, with the anvil firmly seated on something, will cause a primer initiated slamfire. A high primer can cause a slamfire but only if the anvil is firmly seated. High primers are one of the most common cause of misfires because the primer won't fire unless the anvil is seated and is pushed up into the primer cake. However, given a shallow pocket it is theoretically possible that high primers could have done this.

Just examine the back of the ammunition you have and see if there are high or cocked primers.

It is also safety critical to use the least sensitive primer around because these rifles will slamfire in battery or worse, out of battery, given a sensitive enough primer.

I recommend CCI #34's and Tula7.62 primers as they considered "Mil Spec" primers. Which means they are less sensitive than commercial primers, federal being the most sensitive commercial primer on the market.

It is my considered opinion that Granda Pa's reloads cracked your receiver. It is also my considered opinion that your receiver cannot be repaired.

You are very fortunate that you did not lose an eye, or have wood fragments injure you.

Would you please post clear pictures of the blown case and the primer? The slamfire cases I have seen had clear firing pin indentations in the primer.

[Willie Sutton]

Thanks Slamfire... well said and well written.

Attached is a photo of a REAL welding job on a receiver: Splicing together one from two pieces. Welds were then machined to remove excess metal, receivers refinished, and sold by the thousands post WW-II, as it was the only way to procure a Garand at the time. These turn up less frequently these days with all of the DCM and now CMP Garands available.


Willie

.

[Slamfire]

Wille: That is ugly!

I really doubt anyone would recommend repairing a receiver cracked on the sidewalls or receiver heel.

The bolt comes back and rebounds off the receiver heel. The heel and sides have to withstand the impacts without cracking.

The few rewelds I have seen were joined in the middle. Thicker receiver section maybe easier to align.

[Willie Sutton]

Ugly is Ugly.. agreed. But this is how 1000's of them were spliced together in the old days, and how M-14 clones were made (chopping Garand receivers in half, shortening them, and re-welding) before M1's and then later M1A's were available.

Seems like a lot of work to get a rifle, but these things were not nearly as common in the 50's as they are now.

Today folks only weld things like Thompsons & Berettas back together.... (see attached)

Or MG-34's... (see attached as well)


Willie

.

[Willie Sutton]

Can only load 3 images to a post... here's the same MG-34 after welding...

(not my work, BTW... I just stole the images from the net)


Willie

.

[musher]

I'm sure some of the spring-chester rewelds done back in the day cracked, but my understanding is that the biggest complaints were unreliable operation and inability to get predictable results from adjusting the sights.

Both problems related to lack of alignment between the rewelded halves.

If I squint, it looks like Willie's picture is an example of such misalignment.

[the old gringo]

do not weld big no no !!!! that is one of the best made weapons took a good bang to do that hang it on the wall contact the cmp and go again good luck

[LkWd_Don]

You could get the parts you need directly from the CMP program if you are either a Member, Prior Military Service (and able to provide proof) or a member of a Gun Club that is on their list of Member clubs.
Here is a link directly to their M1 Garand Part listings.
http://odcmp.com/Sales/m1garand.htm

Edit: A striped receiver is $195 + shipping, a barreled Receiver with bolt is $350 plus shipping.

[dahermit]

Sir;
NEVER, NEVER, weld on any part of any rifle reciever!
Harry B. Looking at the cracks and having an understanding of modern welding equipment, methods, techniques of welding including heat-stop paste, heat sinks, post-welding re-heat treat, etc., I would opine that those cracks are indeed repairable. The finished product would be dependent upon the knowledge and skill of the welder. After all, that receiver started out as a red-hot piece of metal and the processes that produced a safe finished product can be reproduced after welding. Let us not run in circles shouting dire warnings of doom and a falling sky.

[Willie Sutton]

Thank You....


There's a bit of a difference between someone who views welding as the result of what their muffler shop does with a stick and a $69 plug into the wall AC "spark box" and the view of someone who understands the science of modern metal fusing.

Jet engine turbine blades are welded... but not by anyone at the muffler shop with an AC spark box... :eek:


What is impossible for one man is a lunchtime project for another.


Willie

.

[James K]

Well, with Slamfire claiming that those rifles blow up all over the place, scattering pieces across the landscape, and Willie Sutton wanting to weld the pieces back together, I guess it is time for the ignorant, unwashed like me to get out of here before Amsdorf sends us all to the Gulag for daring to call it an M1 instead of a Garand, the only term ever used by anyone ever, ever.

Jim

[Slamfire]

text deleted

[1911Tuner]

Actually.... that receiver is not probably badly cracked enough to remove it from service. That's not a highly stressed area of the receiver

Willie called it. That's the impact abutment for the bolt, and all the real stress is over by the time the bolt gets there. I think that a weld would hold it, and even if it fails...the rifle won't blow up.

[James K]

One more comment, if I am permitted.

That was NOT a slamfire. Now go figure out what really happened. The key is the cartridge case.

JIm

[dahermit]

Even if that receiver was safe to fire with the existing cracks, from a purely aesthetic point of view, if the gun were mine, I would prefer a very neat MIG weldament bead or a welded and refinished area more than I could live with cracks. It is the compulsive repair person within me.

[LkWd_Don]

I guess it is time for the ignorant, unwashed like me to get out of here before Amsdorf sends us all to the Gulag for daring to call it an M1 instead of a Garand, the only term ever used by anyone ever, ever.

Jim

Interesting, the CMP refers to both the Garand and the Carbine as M1's and when I was growing up, many moons ago.. I remember going onto the various Military bases with my Dad and seeing men carrying the Garands and they were calling it an M1 . My Dad who was a Korean War vet carried an M1 Garand and not an M1 Carbine.

If you don't want to belive me that the proper term for it is really M1 Garand, check out:
http://odcmp.com/Sales/m1garand.htm
http://olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_rifle_m1garand.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Garand

[James K]

The proper and correct military terminology is Rifle, M1, and Carbine, M1 (or M2, M3), and all the FM's, TM's, TOE's, training documents, etc. call the former the Rifle, M1 or the M1 Rifle. None refer to it as the Garand. Soldiers commonly called it the "M1" with "rifle" assumed; the M1 carbine was simply "the carbine". But some folks insist that all soldiers, all the time, always called it the "Garand" and never called it the "M1". I am sure a few soldiers did call it the "Garand", but that name was very uncommon. I note that those folks who hold out for "Garand" never served in the Army when the M1 rifle was in use, but have gained their expertise in other ways.

Jim

[LkWd_Don]

The proper and correct military terminology is Rifle, M1, and Carbine, M1 (or M2, M3), and all the FM's, TM's, TOE's, training documents, etc. call the former the Rifle, M1 or the M1 Rifle. None refer to it as the Garand. Soldiers commonly called it the "M1" with "rifle" assumed; the M1 carbine was simply "the carbine". But some folks insist that all soldiers, all the time, always called it the "Garand" and never called it the "M1". I am sure a few soldiers did call it the "Garand", but that name was very uncommon. I note that those folks who hold out for "Garand" never served in the Army when the M1 rifle was in use, but have gained their expertise in other ways.

Jim
My experience says differently. Especially when there were two different M1's in use at the same time.
They were both called "M1 Rifle 30 Caliber" or "Rifle 30 Caliber M1". But the M1 Garand was clip fed where the M1 Carbine was magazine fed. The only way to differentiate between the two M1's was M1 Garand or M1 Carbine.

[James K]

Maybe there were different terms used at different times, Don, when were you in service?

With your experience, you should know that they were not both called "rifles". The rifle was the rifle, the carbine was the carbine. Not the same any more than the Helmet, M1 was the same as the Tank, M1 or the Field Jacket, M1.

Jim

[LkWd_Don]

Maybe there were different terms used at different times, Don, when were you in service?

With your experience, you should know that they were not both called "rifles". The rifle was the rifle, the carbine was the carbine. Not the same any more than the Helmet, M1 was the same as the Tank, M1 or the Field Jacket, M1.

Jim

I grew up as a Military brat being drug on and around many bases as long as I can remember, then I joined and served till my own retirement from the Army in 1994. I remember looking at some of the old Manuals calling them, "Rifle, 30 Caliber M1" but the M1 Garand had the distinction of being called a Battle Rifle where the M1 carbine never could achieve that, with it only being accurate to around 150 yards. I will see if I can find some on-line versions of the old tech/operator manuals I recall seeing during my years.

For now the links that I provided to CMP are the best available.
http://odcmp.com/Sales/carbine.htm
http://odcmp.com/Sales/m1garand.htm

EDIT: Found a site that shows photos (scans) of the TM9-1005-222-12 that should provide you with what I am saying.
http://www.kmike.com/M1/TM9-1005-222-12Frame.htm Please note how the given nomenclature is Rifle, Caliber 30 M1 then it talks about the sniper versions and finally in Large bold print Say's M1 - Garand

Also in the FM 23-5 you will find it called: "U.S. Rifle, CALIBER .30, M1"
http://www.kmike.com/M1/m1.htm and if you click on the introduction chapter it gives the correct operational description. The U.S. rifle caliber .30, M1, (fig. 1), is an air-cooled, gas-operated, clip-fed, and semiautomatic shoulder weapon.

I did find the TM9-1276 for as you are calling them, Carbines, Cal 30, M1, M1A1, M2 and M3 at
http://www.scribd.com/haraoi_conal/d/23347955-Tm-9-1276-Carbines-Cal-30-M1-M1A1-M2-and-M3-1947
but as you can clearly see it is still an M1.. But likewise, you are right in that they are not calling it a rifle. Note the book claims it was accurate to 300 yards. Few of those who I have spoken with that ever had to carry and fire it had that impression.

[James K]

I am not going to check all those but your M1 rifle TM is a modern commercial reprint, with the word "Garand" added to enlighten those who don't know what an M1 rifle is.

Take a look here for a picture of the original, which does NOT use the name "Garand".

http://www.ebay.com/itm/TM-9-1005-222-12-M1C-M1D-Sniper-Rifle-Manual-1969-/190484590891

Jim

[bbman25]

Hey all, sorry for not getting back here in a day or two.

Great discussion, lots of things I haven't heard before. Learning plenty of new things as well.

I have to check my Granpda's house for the case.. I dont know if he saved it or not. I hope so, cause I wanted to keep it as a souvenir of a possible near death experience, or simply because its neat. How often do you get a 30-06 blown into a straight tube?

Childish wishes aside, my grandfather and everyone else down at the sportsmans rifle range in town HIGHLY reccomended against welding it. Several are veterans who have carried the rifle WWII/Korea and even they reccomend against it. Not to talk down to any of you, who stand by welding and put out very good points. The way I look at it, if I would spend a few hundred for parts, I might as well just buy a new rifle if I can find one for a cheap price. As for testing the cracks, my grandfather, and everyone at the range in town also will not let me shoot it in the current state. I've asked already, wanting to see if it worsens with lighter loaded rounds. Safety issues I guess, however I have been known to take some not needed risks. This one I might have to give in on though.

@Slamfire, I think the primers we use are Remmington.. I know the rounds started out as Federal loads made specificly for the M1, I can't remember off the top of my head what the brand/type of powder we used were. The bullets were 150 grain, remmington I believe, that we picked up at Cabelas.

The rifle was purchased from a small gun show in PA about 3 years ago, and the seller never mentioned anything about it being welded. It has worked great from then up until the receiver cracked. I only ever had 3 jams out of maybe 1200 rounds we put through it.
I have looked into the CMP, but its a bit of a drive to either store from where we are, not that I'm not up for a road trip to get a new rifle. I would first need to sign up and make sure I meet all the criteria, mainly finding a club/organization associated with them.

If I can find the case, I will have some pictures up ASAP, and while I'm at it, does anyone want to see anything else? different views of the receiver.. the whole rifle.. anything?

Thanks for all the input everyone.

[Slamfire]

Reported slamfire events are rather rare, so pictures of a rifle involved in an out of battery incident would be interesting.

What about pictures of the stock and receiver area showing damage.

Any damage around receiver lug recesses? Depending on the amount of lug engagement, burrs occur from the bolt skipping its way back.

[bbman25]

As far as I know the area around lugs didn't get damaged, and the rest of the receiver looks alright as well save for the cracks. I haven't done any testing to determine whether or not there is more damage though. I'm at work on my phone right now, so when I get home I'll have a few more pictures up, showing a few other areas. I'll see if I can get one of rhe op rod showing the bend, its hard to tell it from the factory bend in it already. No word on the case from my grabdpa yet, I'll check with him again later on.

[bbman25]

Okay, here are several images of the different parts of the receiver, stock, and op rod. They might be a little large or hard to see clearly.. camera issues, sorry. This first one is a comparison of a normal case, and the case that killed the rifle.

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/181112_421881324498925_1969027002_n.jpg

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/253298_421879044499153_708199046_n.jpg

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/179522_421878891165835_1739454375_n.jpg

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/182163_421878851165839_1719846219_n.jpg

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/576580_421878957832495_465326531_n.jpg

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/532853_421879101165814_100000311839608_1352181_1424694129_n.jpg

[bbman25]

part #2 of images, these are the last ones.

in this one you can see where the bent op rod has been rubbing against the barrel.
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/537757_421879171165807_1083231833_n.jpg

Here you can see the end of the spring has been tweaked a little
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/317975_421879207832470_1540904576_n.jpg

Its hard to see, but the op rod is bent outward from the rifle barrel. If you look at it a certain way it is easier to see.
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/525003_421879321165792_1745878333_n.jpg

You can see that the action does not close all the way unless it is given a hard whack forward.
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/182776_421879417832449_1949893452_n.jpg

any questions about any of them just ask me and I'll see if I can explain it.

[Slamfire]

Thanks for the pictures.

Very interesting.

Grandpa's ammunition was not that hot, which is good, because the 30-06 slamfire rounds I have seen were blown much lower in the case, indicating higher pressure.

As a case comes back, at some point the sidewall is unable to contain the pressure. The ones I handled looked almost cut, very precise on the location, no ragged, irregular edges.

Looks your case just blew out full diameter with no evidence of case rupture. That would indicate very low pressures.

A gunsmith can bend the operating rod to track properly.

I would get a CMP receiver and have the rifle built around that receiver. I would get a new stock.
http://www.thecmp.org/Sales/m1garand.htm

The receiver heel fits tighter to the stock heel section and it provides a gas barrier. If you notice there should be an air gap under the receiver ahead of the stock heel. This is a gas vent and protects the shooter in case of gas release in the action. Since your stock has a chip in that area, you really should just get a new tight fitting stock. Though someone could possibly fix the old, if there is no other damage. I would replace based on what I see.

[James K]

I have finally decided to point out why that was not a slamfire and to describe what actually happened. All I ask is that those with other ideas read what I write before sneering at my "stupidity", calling me names and questioning my ancestry.

First, the cartridge was heavily overloaded. (Even experienced reloaders can - and do - make mistakes.) Probably what was intended to be a light load was double charged, but in any event it was a serious overload.

The rifle fired normally, but pressure went sky high and only the strong M1 action prevented a blow up. The bullet went down the barrel at a high velocity, and as it passed the gas port, the gas, at a very high pressure port pressure, impinged on the operating rod, trying to push it back.

But the residual chamber pressure was still so high that the locking lugs were pressed tightly against the lug seats and did not move immediately. The op rod, under pressure at the front, and unable to move at the rear, bent.

Then, the bolt began to open and unlock. But the residual pressure was still high. Not enough to burst the case, but high enough to force the thinner case neck and shoulder out against the chamber wall as the case moved back, accounting for what appears to be almost a straight case. I think if you look, you will find that the primer is smeared and that the case head is flattened, almost obliterating the head stamp.

That residual pressure drove the bolt back hard, so it struck the rear of the receiver and broke it.

That is what happened, not a slamfire; a true slamfire (firing out of battery) would have blown the case apart, released high pressure gas into the magazine well and action, blown apart the receiver sides and splintered the stock. Yes, there have been slamfires with the M1 rifle, but this was not one.

Jim

[1911Tuner]

I think Mr. K's description is spot on. I was on hand for a true out of battery/slam fire with an M1 several years ago. It was pretty ugly. The shooter was injured, but he got lucky.

[mapsjanhere]

Good that you are writing that Jim; I was looking at the pictures and couldn't figure out how the op rod got bent in an out-of-battery situation where the barrel pressure would be low.

[Slamfire]

I would be interested in seeing a picture of the case head and primer. Maybe the OP will post that.

[bbman25]

slamfire- I can get a picture of it for tomorrow sometime.

[bbman25]

the case on the left is a normal one, the right is the one from the incident.
the primer has a much deeper indent in it, it is also slightly narrower than the normal one. sorry for the poor quality, cell phone cameras aren't all that great. Other than the deeper indent, nothing else appears to be abnormal.

[James K]

That doesn't help much, just brass colored blurs. Any chance of getting better and closer pics?

Jim

[Slamfire]

Thanks for the pictures.

Given the OP says:

Other than the deeper indent, nothing else appears to be abnormal.

I doubt there will ever be enough resolution to resurrect the idea that this was an over pressure event.

These normal looking primers are what you see in out of battery slamfires. I don’t know why the primers have normal firing pin indentations, but they do. I have seen two, the second blew the back end of the receiver off the rifle.

When the physical evidence is different from the theory, the theory must be wrong.

The slamfire cases I picked up, they were ruptured/cut about half to 2/3 rds of the way, this case is not ruptured so I am of the opinion that the loads were light.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/GarandSlamfireCasewithRemingtonPrimer.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/Slamfireprimeronright.jpg

[g.willikers]

As to the question of weld or don't weld,
One of the very best machinists and welders that I ever ran across had a saying,
"You can fix anything but a broken heart."
And he could.
Unfortunately the guy doing the welding might not be one of the best.
So, two questions should be asked.
Is the reward of saving an old shooter worth the risk?
And, do you feel lucky?
(Had to get that one in).
Personally, unless it was the last gun of its type on the planet, I'd park it.