|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 2, 2019, 10:40 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Garand Chamber Pressure
From an earlier thread:
https://web.archive.org/web/20000620...rpo/M1load.htm If not . . . https://www.sportsmansguide.com/prod...unds?a=1791292 (w/ which the OP shot at nice target ) https://www.midwayusa.com/product/95...l-metal-jacket and for light reading https://www.guns.com/news/2011/08/16...-garand-part-i https://www.guns.com/news/2011/08/23...garand-part-ii .[/QUOTE] Again, links to sites stating arsenal 30-06 ammo chamber peak pressures are 50,000 psi and commercial ammo pressures are 60,000 psi. Does it matter that arsenals (and early commercial ammo plants) used copper crusher pressure test systems whose tarage table for the lot of copper discs used translated their crushed dimension to 50,000 cup but they stated "psi"? And up to date SAAMI specs for that same system lists 50,000 copper units of pressure using crushers and 60,000 psi using pressure measuring transducers? Last edited by Bart B.; June 2, 2019 at 11:51 AM. |
June 2, 2019, 11:50 AM | #2 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,833
|
Does it matter? I don't think so. I don't think it matter if modern pressure measurement systems yield a different number than the old copper crusher system. Its just a number, and when properly placed in context, doesn't matter if what they thought was 50K was actually discovered to be 42K or 60K, today, what matters is what they thought, and did, at the time.
Quote:
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
June 2, 2019, 11:57 AM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
|
|
June 2, 2019, 12:00 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
That sort of legacy data led a lot of people to believe that .308 Win. was a 20% overload for a 7.62 NATO.
The Merrill article you link makes the same assumption, that SAAMI maximum is "half again" the pressure of late GI. Which took advantage of IMR4895 to get the velocity older, less progressive burning propellants required higher chamber pressure for. Old time velocities are at "78 feet" because the leBoulenge electro-mechanical chronograph screens were 50 yards apart to get adequate resolution. With the start at 3 feet and the stop at 153 feet, the midpoint was taken as "the distance." |
June 2, 2019, 12:02 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,894
|
As many have brought up before, CUP ≠ PSI (although many worshiped "published" references
simply equated two as editions were updated ...and erroneous pressure units then became gospel.) SAAMI does translate between the two for the `06, citing 50,000 CUP ** or ** 60,000 PSI THAT SAID: Quote:
|
|
June 2, 2019, 12:10 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
Winchester's CUP measuring system was different than Frankfort Arsenal's in the 1950's when they introduced the 308 Win cartridge. They set their 308 pressure spec at 52,000 cup because that is what the arsenal reference ammo produced with their system. Last edited by Bart B.; June 2, 2019 at 12:19 PM. |
|
June 2, 2019, 12:15 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
|
|
June 2, 2019, 12:30 PM | #8 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
June 2, 2019, 12:48 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,894
|
Separate test. That's why I said "for that cartridge"
otherwise, there is only a rough correlation between CUP/PSI -- and it varies (sometimes significantly) from cartridge to cartridge. |
June 2, 2019, 02:32 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
There is a conversion formula but it isn't exact. SAAMI specs for both ways are best for comparisons:
https://saami.org/technical-informat...ami-standards/ |
June 2, 2019, 03:20 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
If you shoot a load listed at maximum CUP versus a load listed at maximum psi, which is "better?"
|
June 2, 2019, 03:47 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
SAAMI spec reference cartridges will produce SAAMI pressure and velocity specs in SAAMI spec CUP and PSI test barrel and chronograph using SAAMI specs for prepping and loading the rounds. There is no accuracy spec. Last edited by Bart B.; June 2, 2019 at 03:57 PM. |
|
June 2, 2019, 04:53 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
There is way too much thinking going on here. An M1 Garand, if you are lucky enough ot own and shoot one, is a precious relic that should never be subjected to maximum (or any load beyond those suggested as appropriate for its continued functioning), loadings...there is just no good reason to do so. If there is a "good" reason to go beyond the loads suggested as appropriate for target and functioning, I would like to hear it.
|
June 2, 2019, 05:56 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
Military teams sometimes used M80 ball ammo using IMR4475 powder rebulleted with Sierra 168 match bullets or 173 grain match bullets pulled from M118 match ammo. No problems shooting these "proof loads" known as Mexican Match in M14 or converted Garands. I've shot over a thousand in Garands without problems. They were loaded and issued by the USN Match Conditioning Unit that rebuilt Garands. much more accurate than M118 match ammo testing sub MOA at 600 yards. The 7.62 NATO M60 proof load at 67,500 cup, about 81,000 psi. |
|
June 2, 2019, 07:18 PM | #15 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,750
|
Garand Chamber Pressure
Quote:
With a focus on the M1 Garand and only the M1 Garand I figure things this way. When John C. Garand designed the rifle he designed it as a gas operated semi-automatic shoulder weapon. He designed his rifle to cycle using a sample of the gas pressure bleeding off behind a bullet before the bullet exits the barrel. The concern here is not the chamber pressure but rather the pressure at a point about (not looking at a drawing) 1.5" aft of the muzzle. I am not about to look up the hole diameter but how things work is not that complicated. Now if we figure our bullet which began with a given chamber pressure is zipping along down a barrel and the breech end is blocked by the cartridge case the gas pressure is going to be dropping since the volume is increasing. I have seen estimates that when the gas reaches the gas port the chamber pressure behind the bullet is about 8,000 with a rough plus or minus 2,000 PSI. Now it stands to reason that whatever we end up with at the gas port hole will be a function of what we started with. The rifle is designed, like any other gas operated gun, within a specific range of pressure. Too litle pressure and the rifle will short stroke and not cycle as designed. Too much pressure and the rifle will destroy itself and possibly the shooter. As to pressure. The CUP (Copper Units Pressure) and the PSI Piezo-ceramic sensors each operate on totally different principals and when measuring chamber pressures each used a completely separate method and procedure for taking the measurements. The measurements weren't even taken at the same points in a chamber. The fact that the results are not the same should not come as a surprise to anyone. For decades, years and years the CUP method was used and we did just fine. The new method using technology which wasn't around during early CUP testing not only gives more accurate results but also allows us to see a pressure curve and note when and where the peak occurs. The idea being we operate a rifle within the limits it was designed to work in. How many reloaders are dragging a pressure sensing out to the range? The majority just work from published load data for a specific cartridge for a specific gun. You have a Garand you either buy the right ammunition for it or you load using data published for it. Arsenals aside nobody on the range is measuring their chamber pressure. Quote:
Ron |
||
June 2, 2019, 07:42 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Peak 30-06 Garand gas cylinder pressure is about 2,000 to 2,400 psi dependent on ammo type and lot number. Bullet velocity spread about 30 fps.
|
June 2, 2019, 08:54 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,750
|
Quote:
The end result will always be the same. Going to the store and buying a box of 30-06 220 grain bullets and loading them in a M1 Garand is not a good idea. Buying ammunition manufactured for use in an M1 Garand is a good idea. Loading ammunition using load data, on or near maximum standard 30-06 Springfield for an M1 Garand is not a good idea. Loading 30-06 Springfield using load data considered safe for an M1 Garand is a good idea. There is only so much which can be said about chamber pressures and the M1 Garand rifle. Ron |
|
June 2, 2019, 09:54 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Quote:
I think all commercial 30-06 match ammo is safe for Garands. And matched by reloading. Many thousands of such rounds were used by both military and civilians because it was more accurate than military M72 match ammo. Some rebulleted M72 ammo with Sierra 180 grain hunting or match bullets that was more accurate, about 8 inches .at 600. The best M72 tested about 12 inches at 600 yards in bolt guns, about 15 inches in the best rebuilt Garands. Last edited by Bart B.; June 2, 2019 at 10:49 PM. |
|
June 3, 2019, 07:15 AM | #19 | |
Junior member
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,374
|
Quote:
These adjustable plugs allow you to do exactly that - ask me how I know. In fact, for my '06 'hunter' M1, which runs the Schuster plug, I've got a deer/hog load dailed-in using Hornady's 220gn RN bullets over Varget. It pretty much duplicates Remmy's 220gn CoreLok load. Quite accurate too. Mucho port pressure data here with various commercial '06 'hunting' ammo: http://www.garandgear.com/m1-garand-ammunition Last edited by agtman; June 3, 2019 at 07:27 AM. |
|
June 3, 2019, 07:47 AM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,750
|
Agtman, that's right and I forgot to mention the use of an adjustable gas plug such as the Schuster plugs.
Thanks Ron |
June 3, 2019, 08:20 AM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Delete
Last edited by Bart B.; June 3, 2019 at 03:12 PM. |
June 3, 2019, 02:08 PM | #22 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,750
|
Bart:
Quote:
Bart: Quote:
Ron |
||
June 3, 2019, 03:08 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
Ron,
My error. Deleted earlier post. Cylinder pressure peaked 490 microseconds after bullet passed gas port. Not after hammer fall. Last edited by Bart B.; June 3, 2019 at 03:34 PM. Reason: Misread link |
June 3, 2019, 04:55 PM | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,750
|
Quote:
Looking at the 490 uSec I am a little hard pressed to buy off on that. The M1 Garand has a 24 inch barrel. Now that includes chamber but even with due consideration to the chamber our bullet is traveling at roughly 2650-2700 FPS and in the case of M72 2640 FPS when it exits the muzzle. The gas port hole in the barrel is about 1.5 inches aft of muzzle. So the bullet has about 1.5 inches to travel when it passes the gas port, not very far. 1.5 inches = 0.125 feet 0.125 feet × ( 1 second / 2650 feet ) = 0.000 047 seconds 0.125 feet × ( 1 second / 2700 feet ) = 0.000 046 seconds The way I figure it, give or take a little, that bullet is gone about 46 to 47 uSEC after it clears the gas port in the barrel. The 490 microseconds just seems a bit of a long time for the pressure to peak in the gas cylinder. They are telling me the gas cylinder pressure peaked about 440 uSEC after the bullet has left the building so to speak. Something else I have noticed is much of this seems to depend on what we read. As you mentioned, this link including a chart, reflects a peak gas cylinder pressure of maybe 1100 PSI. That pretty much runs with the prior Garand Gear link. Maybe it does take that long for the pressure in the gas cylinder to peak, I really don't know and I am not about to try and instrument a M1 Garand and drag it out to the range. I have a few other projects ahead of that. Really, while this stuff is interesting all I really care about is how well does my rifle shoot? Does it cycle without any flaws ans how are my group sizes? Ron |
|
June 3, 2019, 08:25 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 8,927
|
|
|
|