M2 AP Surplus Armor Piercing Ammo Loads

3006loader · August 25, 2016, 03:11 AM

Does anyone have any good loads for the 162 grain (actual weight 160-165 grains) surplus armor piercing bullet found in M1 Garand enbloc clips? I would be using it in a very strong modern bolt action gun. My goal is to load these bullets so they are moving at a higher velocity than the surplus ammo which is underpowered because it is made to be used in Garands without bending the op rod. I was trying to use modern load data for it but this bullet differs in construction greatly from most other bullets. Because the steel core is lighter than lead, the bullet is longer it has a lot more bearing surface which could lead to higher pressures, Right? Would using data for 165gr solid copper bullets be the closest thing I could find to a similarly structured bullet?

Jimro · August 25, 2016, 06:57 AM

Component substitution is always a fun subject.

Hornady 165gr GMX seems to meet your needs as a starting point, but Hornady says the GMX is compatible with conventional bullet reloading data.

Of course the Hodgdon reloading data maxes the 165 GMX out at 2,818 fps using Hybrid 100V and yet pushes the 165gr Sierra soft point to 2,972 using Superformance.

But apples to apples, the Hybrid 100V data for the Sierra is 57gr Compressed at 2,801 fps for the Sierra, and 56.7gr compressed for the GMX, although there is about 4,000 psi difference between the loads (the GMX is higher).

So it looks like 2,800 fps is about the upper limit for pressure if you are staying within SAAMI spec for pressure. If you are just going to load up until the primers start showing signs of pressure then back off some, no way to really estimate that upper limit.

Jimro

briandg · August 25, 2016, 07:16 AM

good luck. I am darned if I can even begin to come up with an answer. Jim is right that the best you an probably do is just cobble together other data and watch for pressure.

rg1 · August 25, 2016, 10:56 AM

I worked up loads for my bolt action 30-06 Rem 700 22" barrel with the 163 AP bullet using IMR 4350 powder. I was only trying to duplicate the velocity of the original military round. Use this data carefully and work up and do consult other data sources for similar weight bullets.
163 gr. AP--All RP cases---RP 9 1/2 primers---my overall length 3.320"-3.325"
Make sure they chamber without jamming into the lands in your rifle.
Temp. 65 degrees
IMR 4350 powder:
start 52 grains---2501 fps
53 gr.------2546-2583 fps
54 gr.------2587-2596 fps
55 gr.------2633-2638 fps
56 gr.------2687 fps
Had no pressure signs up to 56 grains. Didn't load any higher than 56 grains. This info is just to compare 163-165 gr. bullets. Win LR primers will add a little velocity to this load and CCI LR's will be a little less velocity plus in longer barrels the velocity will be higher. I only tested two loads with Win LR and CCI LR. Win gave about 30 fps more, CCI 20-30 fps less than RP 9 1/2 primers. My load is with 55 grains of IMR 4350 which shot well in my rifle and adequate velocity.

T. O'Heir · August 25, 2016, 12:38 PM

"...because it is made to be used in Garands without bending the op rod..." Not in any way true. .30 AP's 168 grain bullet ran/runs at 2800 fps using IMR4895. Exactly the same as post-1940 .30 M2 Ball with its 152 grain bullet.
Anyway, .30 cal AP bullets were 168 grains. Use 168 grain IMR4895 or IMR4064(or any M1 Rifle suitable powder) load data and you'll be fine.
"...data for 165gr solid copper bullets..." Not really. Copper bullets have less density and are longer than a lead cored(or an AP) bullet of the same weight. Load data is very close to the same anyway. Barnes shows the same data for their 165's and 168's too. Three grains doesn't make enough difference.

RC20 · August 25, 2016, 05:35 PM

Agreed, its the burn rate that was adjusted (or powder used) that did not bend the rod not the overall speed.

Do not go by primers, go by ALL pressure signs.

That means a shell holder on hand as significant overpressure the shell holder will not slide over the base right.

Micrometer to measure the case.

Is it sticking.

Jimro · August 26, 2016, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Copper bullets have less density and are longer than a lead cored(or an AP) bullet of the same weight.

Partially true, copper bullets are less dense than lead cored bullets, but they are more dense than steel cored AP bullets. Given equal mass, the steel cored bullet will be longer than a copper bullet.

Lead 11.36 g/cm3
Copper 8.96 g/cm3
Iron 7.87 g/cm3

I looked into a different data source, Nosler's 168gr E-Tip solid copper bullet is supposedly able to break 3,000 fps using RL-22, from a bolt action rifle of course. I'd say that's probably the best powder choice. although a drop tube becomes a necessity since even the starting charge of 59 grains is a 107% case fill, and the max charge of 63gr is 114%. But if you want velocity, I haven't found a better option yet.

Jimro

Clark · August 28, 2016, 08:30 AM

In 1999 black tipped bullets were 5 cents in Shotgun news.
Now with the internet, I have seen them at $5.

Jimro · August 28, 2016, 01:43 PM

Black tip covers a multitude of contractors and construction methods ranging from very good to very bad. I've heard of more than one less than scrupulous gun show deal selling European black tip (which signified plain FMJ ball ammo for that country) as AP bullets.

Honestly I can't think of a scenario where I would need AP bullets for anything short of defeating a particularly deep inside the engine cavity engine block since it won't go through the armor of any modern fighting vehicle, and other bullets are equally as good at shooting through windshields (X bullet, Trophy Bonded Bear Claw). Maybe if I had to shoot through the front blade of a bulldozer or something I could see needing a bullet of that specific construction.

And there I go, rambling again....

Jimro

RC20 · August 28, 2016, 07:26 PM

If the OP is afeter max velocity then R-17 is probably the best option

Pressure at high end is the same but it sustains the burn pressure longer, not a spike but a plateau.

Supposed to be able to get 150 fps more speed. I have not tried it as I have not need for speed.

Funny with all the 300WM stuff, you can get that out of an 06 in non magnum m action, lower affect on the barrel, less smack.

I have had reactions huh?, just because its an old cartridge.

Funny part is the with the AI back in the day that were all the rage that in an 06 you might get 50FPS (and many said nothing) and now with the right powder you can match a 300 wm and they want the 300 wm.

Marco Califo · August 28, 2016, 08:23 PM

oo

**Unclenick** · August 29, 2016, 02:11 PM

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3006loader

My goal is to load these bullets so they are moving at a higher velocity than the surplus ammo which is underpowered because it is made to be used in Garands without bending the op rod.

Military loads of .30-06, including those made with the slow lot of WC852 that was never certified for the Garand, but only for machine guns, are adjusted for matching velocity and ballistic coefficient to provide the military with a good match to the range graduations on their gun's sights. They don't want them either flatter shooting or more arched in trajectory than their sights work best with. Naturally, there are long range differences, but keeping sights timed is one of the general objectives.

As commented above, 168.5 -3.0 grs (165.5-168.5 grs) was the original official specified weight of .30-06 AP ammo (see, Hatcher's Book of the Garand, p. 125), at which time it had a 4% tungsten alloy core. But that was later (1941-42?) changed to manganese-molybdenum steel, likely for cost reasons. Manganese-molybdenum steels are typically about 2.5% less dense than 4% tungsten steel, and, allowing that copper and lead make up the rest of the bullet, that change seems to have been responsible for about 1.7% overall bullet weight reduction to the later specified 165.7 -3.0 grs (162.7-165.7 grs).

These bullets were popular with snipers in WWII, being considered more accurate than M2 ball. National Match ammo was best, when available, but the flat base and long body of the AP bullet apparently made it shoot pretty well, despite the complex 3-part construction.

Sectioned photos of these bullets show (there's one in a YouTube video somewhere that also mentions a specific core alloy) the copper jacket is very thick and is hard up against the sides of the steel core. That means these bullets should actually be harder than a copper solid is overall. But that assumes the same copper alloy is used in both and that may not be the case.

Playing around in QuickLOAD, I created a model of the 1.4" long AP bullet seating it to 3.330" COL and found that with IMR 4895 and RL17 it matched loads for the Speer 200 grain soft point seated at 2.295" pretty closely. So go to data for that bullet as a starting point, and do start at the bottom load and work up. One of the military tech manuals (not a reliable source of load data) claims 55 grains of WC852 was loaded behind this bullet at one time (1960-70's, probably for machine guns). From the size of the charge I surmise that was likely to have been the slow lot of WC852, not certified for Garands. H380 is canister grade fast lot WC852, for which 52 grains might be a more reasonable upper number if you want to try copying the AP load from the Vietnam era, but I won't guarantee anything about that. YMMV, as the source data isn't something I like starting from. So, again, start low and work up.

Finally, while it is fun to speed things up, with AP ammo, you may find not only accuracy deterioration due to increased in-flight wobble from the faster spin, but that penetration of some materials, like wood, is actually diminished due to increased propensity to tumble in thick target medium at higher speed. Indeed, you'll probably find best penetration of thick targets, even with the standard AP load, is happening out around 200 yards. That run gives the bullet time to settle out of initial yaw, so the tendency of the tip to divert in traveling through a high drag medium is reduced. Hatcher's Notebook has an illustration of this where the 150 grain M2 Ball bullet penetrates 30+ inches into oak at either 150 or 200 yards (I've forgotten which), but at 50 feet it only penetrated about 11 inches into the same medium as it had turned sideways after entry, greatly increasing the amount of wood it was trying to displace, and also presenting the more blunt side profile to it.

3006loader · September 15, 2016, 06:28 PM

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

Well I went out to the woods to test my 57.0gr of H414 handloads on a chronograph. I worked these loads up from 52.0gr to 58.0gr. 58.0gr showed pressure signs on the third shot, whereas 57.0gr and lower never showed any pressure signs. So I stuck with 57. OAL Varied from 3.320" to 3.330". The grains were entered in as 165.

Results:
Velocity(ft/sec)------Energy(ft/lbs)
2956----------------------3201
2917----------------------3117
2936----------------------3157
2955----------------------3199
2941----------------------3168

WOW. I am more than pleased with the results of these loads. They are not only moving a lot faster and are more powerful than the original M2 AP, but they will also penetrate clean through a 1" steel plate, when the old AP cores would get stuck halfway in and just bulge the other side of the plate. Mission accomplished.

August 25, 2016, 03:11 AM	#1
3006loader Member Join Date: August 14, 2016 Location: Greatest country in the world Posts: 61	M2 AP Surplus Armor Piercing Ammo Loads Does anyone have any good loads for the 162 grain (actual weight 160-165 grains) surplus armor piercing bullet found in M1 Garand enbloc clips? I would be using it in a very strong modern bolt action gun. My goal is to load these bullets so they are moving at a higher velocity than the surplus ammo which is underpowered because it is made to be used in Garands without bending the op rod. I was trying to use modern load data for it but this bullet differs in construction greatly from most other bullets. Because the steel core is lighter than lead, the bullet is longer it has a lot more bearing surface which could lead to higher pressures, Right? Would using data for 165gr solid copper bullets be the closest thing I could find to a similarly structured bullet?

August 25, 2016, 06:57 AM	#2
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	Component substitution is always a fun subject. Hornady 165gr GMX seems to meet your needs as a starting point, but Hornady says the GMX is compatible with conventional bullet reloading data. Of course the Hodgdon reloading data maxes the 165 GMX out at 2,818 fps using Hybrid 100V and yet pushes the 165gr Sierra soft point to 2,972 using Superformance. But apples to apples, the Hybrid 100V data for the Sierra is 57gr Compressed at 2,801 fps for the Sierra, and 56.7gr compressed for the GMX, although there is about 4,000 psi difference between the loads (the GMX is higher). So it looks like 2,800 fps is about the upper limit for pressure if you are staying within SAAMI spec for pressure. If you are just going to load up until the primers start showing signs of pressure then back off some, no way to really estimate that upper limit. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

August 25, 2016, 07:16 AM	#3
briandg Senior Member Join Date: May 4, 2010 Posts: 5,468	good luck. I am darned if I can even begin to come up with an answer. Jim is right that the best you an probably do is just cobble together other data and watch for pressure. __________________ None.

August 25, 2016, 10:56 AM	#4
rg1 Senior Member Join Date: November 6, 2001 Posts: 1,125	I worked up loads for my bolt action 30-06 Rem 700 22" barrel with the 163 AP bullet using IMR 4350 powder. I was only trying to duplicate the velocity of the original military round. Use this data carefully and work up and do consult other data sources for similar weight bullets. 163 gr. AP--All RP cases---RP 9 1/2 primers---my overall length 3.320"-3.325" Make sure they chamber without jamming into the lands in your rifle. Temp. 65 degrees IMR 4350 powder: start 52 grains---2501 fps 53 gr.------2546-2583 fps 54 gr.------2587-2596 fps 55 gr.------2633-2638 fps 56 gr.------2687 fps Had no pressure signs up to 56 grains. Didn't load any higher than 56 grains. This info is just to compare 163-165 gr. bullets. Win LR primers will add a little velocity to this load and CCI LR's will be a little less velocity plus in longer barrels the velocity will be higher. I only tested two loads with Win LR and CCI LR. Win gave about 30 fps more, CCI 20-30 fps less than RP 9 1/2 primers. My load is with 55 grains of IMR 4350 which shot well in my rifle and adequate velocity. Last edited by rg1; August 25, 2016 at 11:03 AM.

August 25, 2016, 12:38 PM	#5
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	"...because it is made to be used in Garands without bending the op rod..." Not in any way true. .30 AP's 168 grain bullet ran/runs at 2800 fps using IMR4895. Exactly the same as post-1940 .30 M2 Ball with its 152 grain bullet. Anyway, .30 cal AP bullets were 168 grains. Use 168 grain IMR4895 or IMR4064(or any M1 Rifle suitable powder) load data and you'll be fine. "...data for 165gr solid copper bullets..." Not really. Copper bullets have less density and are longer than a lead cored(or an AP) bullet of the same weight. Load data is very close to the same anyway. Barnes shows the same data for their 165's and 168's too. Three grains doesn't make enough difference. __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

August 25, 2016, 05:35 PM	#6
RC20 Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 7,014	Agreed, its the burn rate that was adjusted (or powder used) that did not bend the rod not the overall speed. Do not go by primers, go by ALL pressure signs. That means a shell holder on hand as significant overpressure the shell holder will not slide over the base right. Micrometer to measure the case. Is it sticking.

August 28, 2016, 08:30 AM	#8
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	In 1999 black tipped bullets were 5 cents in Shotgun news. Now with the internet, I have seen them at $5. __________________ The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books." "Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books. If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view may exist. Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?

August 28, 2016, 01:43 PM	#9
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	Black tip covers a multitude of contractors and construction methods ranging from very good to very bad. I've heard of more than one less than scrupulous gun show deal selling European black tip (which signified plain FMJ ball ammo for that country) as AP bullets. Honestly I can't think of a scenario where I would need AP bullets for anything short of defeating a particularly deep inside the engine cavity engine block since it won't go through the armor of any modern fighting vehicle, and other bullets are equally as good at shooting through windshields (X bullet, Trophy Bonded Bear Claw). Maybe if I had to shoot through the front blade of a bulldozer or something I could see needing a bullet of that specific construction. And there I go, rambling again.... Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

August 28, 2016, 07:26 PM	#10
RC20 Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 7,014	If the OP is afeter max velocity then R-17 is probably the best option Pressure at high end is the same but it sustains the burn pressure longer, not a spike but a plateau. Supposed to be able to get 150 fps more speed. I have not tried it as I have not need for speed. Funny with all the 300WM stuff, you can get that out of an 06 in non magnum m action, lower affect on the barrel, less smack. I have had reactions huh?, just because its an old cartridge. Funny part is the with the AI back in the day that were all the rage that in an 06 you might get 50FPS (and many said nothing) and now with the right powder you can match a 300 wm and they want the 300 wm.

August 28, 2016, 08:23 PM	#11
Marco Califo Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2011 Location: LA (Greater Los Angeles Area) Posts: 2,598	oo __________________ ............ Last edited by Marco Califo; August 28, 2016 at 09:58 PM.

September 15, 2016, 06:28 PM	#13
3006loader Member Join Date: August 14, 2016 Location: Greatest country in the world Posts: 61	CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information. Well I went out to the woods to test my 57.0gr of H414 handloads on a chronograph. I worked these loads up from 52.0gr to 58.0gr. 58.0gr showed pressure signs on the third shot, whereas 57.0gr and lower never showed any pressure signs. So I stuck with 57. OAL Varied from 3.320" to 3.330". The grains were entered in as 165. Results: Velocity(ft/sec)------Energy(ft/lbs) 2956----------------------3201 2917----------------------3117 2936----------------------3157 2955----------------------3199 2941----------------------3168 WOW. I am more than pleased with the results of these loads. They are not only moving a lot faster and are more powerful than the original M2 AP, but they will also penetrate clean through a 1" steel plate, when the old AP cores would get stuck halfway in and just bulge the other side of the plate. Mission accomplished.