Where To Find Shooter's M1 Garands?

Big Bob

Big Bob

Joined
Oct 13, 1999
Messages
1,731
I recently got the itch for an M1 Garand. A few months back or so I read an article in American Rifleman about a gun company that is making M1 Garands and Carbines from surplus parts, aimed at those who are more interested in shooting than collecting. I've tried searching for the company but haven't had any luck. Does anyone here know about this company? Any leads would be appreciated.

Bob
 
i was reading on a review site, that does axes and knives and things, and the guy was basically like "forget buying that fancy military gizmo... get an M1, get spares, buy 10,000 rounds, and pocket the change from getting an mp5 or ar1" or something like that

apparently the M1 has a LOT of punch, more distance, potential dialed in accuracy, and is cheap cheap cheap. pointers good :)

#
 
I think you are looking for a Springfield Armory. This is a private company, not the US arsenal of the same name.

Garands are good rifles, but no more accurate than other issued rifles of the period. I believe the acceptance standard was a 3x6 group at 100 yards - somewhat less than the standard fr the mauser (2" group?) and way less than the standard for the Finnish Moisin 1" at 100 meters, IIRC.

The cartridge is really not much better (in terms of range) than an 8mm or 303 british round, and surplus 30-06 is getting alot harder to find. The fact that the Garand is semi auto means that you use ammo in a particular pressure range to avoid damaging the action which limits the reloading potential. That's not an issue with a bolt gun.

Garands are fine and historic weapons, but they are greatly desired by US collectors, so the prices tend to be way higher that a comparable non-US rifle of the era. If you are interested in a Garand (and why not - I'd love to have a few), the Springfield Armory guns I have seen were right around $1,000 - I'd get the CMP package for less than 1/2 the price.

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this one! :)

Pat
 
I don't think a 150 gr bullet at 2700 fps and change is anything to sneer at, and doubt the 303 is that close.
I've owned 4 Garands and loved them all. Most of the reloading data is safe to use, most but not all. I think the pressure curves matter more than anything and certain powders are desirable.

The M1 may not be quite as accurate as a bolt, but it has 7 more rounds ready to go when the bolt is still being cycled. It is an extremely accurate rifle, and was only suceeded by the M14.

I get a kick out of the M1 because with all those small parts it's just not supposed to be reliable. It is. Very. Modern attempts to better the M1 complain about the weight, but the FN-FAL is even more, and the new SA Sog thingie ll weighs over 10.

It's hard to get that level of power without weight.

I took one deer hunting once and never will again. Too heavy. But it is one of the best shooting, fun, reliable and accurate semi auto rifles around.

I only own it's step child now, the M1A. That weighs almost 9 pounds, shoots .308, and has removable mags.

The Garand is one of the most fun rifles I've ever fired.
I still miss not owning one.

munk
 
I've never had a Garand. Almost bought an Iwo Jima commemorative for my son several months ago, but...still haven't had one.

I envy Munks M1-A though. I had one, but got rid of it for some insipid reason that I can't recall. oh wait...now I remember..I traded it off for a flat top AR-15 that turned out to be a complete piece of crap which got traded off for a Winchester 94 and a lightly customized S&W Model 25 .45 Colt, and those got traded off for a Yamaha YZ 480 dirt bike which blew the transmission within an hour. Boy, did I trade smart.....:rolleyes:

I still kick myself in the rear on a weekly basis for getting rid of my M1-A.

Maybe this'll be the year I get to replace it....:)
 
munk said:
I don't think a 150 gr bullet at 2700 fps and change is anything to sneer at, and doubt the 303 is that close.
I've owned 4 Garands and loved them all. Most of the reloading data is safe to use, most but not all. I think the pressure curves matter more than anything and certain powders are desirable.

The M1 may not be quite as accurate as a bolt, but it has 7 more rounds ready to go when the bolt is still being cycled. It is an extremely accurate rifle, and was only suceeded by the M14.

I get a kick out of the M1 because with all those small parts it's just not supposed to be reliable. It is. Very. Modern attempts to better the M1 complain about the weight, but the FN-FAL is even more, and the new SA Sog thingie ll weighs over 10.

It's hard to get that level of power without weight.

I took one deer hunting once and never will again. Too heavy. But it is one of the best shooting, fun, reliable and accurate semi auto rifles around.

I only own it's step child now, the M1A. That weighs almost 9 pounds, shoots .308, and has removable mags.

The Garand is one of the most fun rifles I've ever fired.
I still miss not owning one.

munk
Click to expand...

Actually Munk, I never said the 30-06 was a load to be sneered at - just that the 303 and 8mm are in the same league. The service load for the .303 is a 174 grain bullet at about 2,500 fps, IIRC. The 8mm load is a 196 grain bulllet at 2450 or so. This is by memory, so I may be off by a few FPS, but handloads can go way beyond that.

The 30-06 has alot of advantages if you are going to handload - readily available bullets in a huge variety of weights and styles, better case capacity than the other two, etc. But if you are talking about surplus ammo .... there isn't that much on the market, and the Garand was designed to be used with service ammo. IIRC, the folks at Fulton Armory (a well respected armorer for Garands) recommend sticking to service equivalent loads for best accuracy and longest rifle life.

That the Garand is a superior service arm for the time can't be denied. The semi auto action gives plenty of ammo on tap, and accuracy is sufficient for combat or casual use. It can be tuned to greater accuracy (but then so can your average mauser). Frankly, the Garand is one of the most pleasant full power rifles I've ever shot, recoil is very moderate and I love the sights. I love that sound as the clip ejects, too. But the Garand is pricey compared to the other shoulder arms from the period, and since they were manufactured in the millions, the cause for the high cost is desirability to collectors.

So, I would say that if you are looking for a blaster to plink away with, there are a number of options where $400 would get you not just a rifle but 1000 rounds of ammo and change. Now, if you want a classic piece of American WWII military history, well the only thing that beats a Garand is a Garand with an M-1 carbine. and Maybe a 1911. :)

Pat
 
The 303 and 8 mm are not loaded to the same chamber pressure as the 30-o6You say it is because of the action bar the Garand is limited; actually, it is because of the diverse mud, rain, multiple rounds fired without cleaning that limits the Garand per military thinking. The best gun men I ever knew, and as a distributor and retail salesman for COBURNS discount in the 90's, I knew plenty, assured me and were in accordance with SAAMI in loading the Garand per reloading manuals. As I said, it is the pressure curve that is more important than amount of gunpowder, the burn rate.

The highest velocity load listed by Lyman, for instance for the 303 British, is 2469 fps for a 180 gr bullet. Speer lists 2421 fps Should I go on? The SAAMI pressure for the 303 is 45000 cup and military ammo is much less. 3006 is 50000 and even the military is something like 4800 out of larger case than the 303. The 8mm is even worse, Listed by SAAMI at 3700 Cup because of the old actions, and different bore diameters in models of mauser.
I reject your assumption/opinion out of hand the Garand's pressure is limited in the fashion you've stated. Instead, I find it largely an old wives tale frequently cited by naive elements of the gun community.

You can safely get 2700 or even nearly 2800 fps in the Garand without damage to the 'action bar" for the 180 gr bullet. I used to think it limited too; until I consulted gunsmiths far more knowledgble than myself.

2700 fps second is much greater than 24oo for the 303. It is wishful thinking to believe the cartridges are the same. One, the 303 lacks the case capacity; Two, the rear locking lugs of the 303 Enfield are not up to the front lugs of the Garand.

The US military made a wise decision in lowering the pressure of the 3006 for military purposes after WWl. Even in 'whimped out' mode, the 303 British piker does not compare to the 3006.

Anyone's belief the two cartridges are roughly equal ballistically are pure pipe dreams. ( though as Jack OConnor was fond of saying; I doubt either in the ribs would do a body good.)

The 8mm enjoys the famous Mauser action. The 303 the fastest cyclic rate of fire of a military bolt.
I'd take a Garand every time.

munk
 
I've seen the asking price for SA Garands. CMP will likely be my choice. Just hope it won't be a bear to find somewhere close to qualify me. There's a youth club in Carbondale, an hour's drive from my place. In the meantime, I've just gotten me a Yugo M48 Mauser to tide me over (ironic that Outdoors brought up mausers). :)

Bob
 
Yeah, Garands are pricey. I remember reams of them at Turners outdoors for 300 bucks. I'd go CMP also, though it wouldn't surprise anyone that the collectables have been picked over.

Outdoors;
I have a couple Mausers with Nazi markings I wished I'd not customized. They'd be worth some money. But back then, you bought a rough looking Mauser to clean up and put a new barrel on. Mine were made in 42 and 41. They say 43 and beyond you are taking chances because German metalurgy was iffy in the late part of the War.

Lake City has some surplus 30;06 for sale, as does Cabelas. You can still get lots of military O6.

munk
 
Munk,
I never said that the 303 and the 30-06 were the same . I simply stated that the 30-06 was not much better in terms of the range that the others - all are 300 yard+ cartridges, suited to combat or big game hunting, but they are not identical.

I was comparing the military loads and after a quick review, my numbers are correct, at least according to Garry James at G&A. I clearly stated that the 30-06 does benefit from greater capacity that the other rounds, and of course can be loaded hotter. I was simply stating that higher velocity handloads are not recommended for the Garand. In fact, Fulton Armory does not recommend handloads at all, for any US Service autoloaders, and they are probably the premier Garands and M1A armorers in the US. That appears to be a new development, as I don't remember seeing that at their website before.

RE 8mm. and 303
Actually, 8mm is only loaded to low pressure stateside, this is not the case in Europe where it was developed. SAAMI is a not a European spec and WW I and WWII Era 8mm loads (and modern European commercial loads) are far in excess of that pressure limit.

One of my loading books list the top 150 grain loads for all three calibers within 200 fps of each other, less than 100 for true european level 8MMJS loads vs 30-06. So, as noted in previous emails, the muzzle velocity is not that different for the service loads (30 cal 150 grain service load at 2600 vs 175 grain bullet at 2500 or 196 grain load at 2496 or so). I consider it a good thing that the 303 and 8mm achive this velocity at lower pressure (due to the larger bore).

I stand by my comments on the availability of surplus 30-06. There are some quantities of it on the market as you mentioned (also Korean surplus loads) but there's alot more choice in the 8mm and prices are way better. 303 is not very available in surplus form these days.

I'm not sure what your point is here Munk. I'm not trying to dis the garand or 30-06 - I like them both and I've said that. I also had a postwar Garand (IH) that I really wish I had not sold. However, I think other milsurps get short shrift because they are not US made. I also wanted to point out that the Garand (like every other weapon) has some flaws. Demand has driven the prices of Garands far beyond non-us weapons for the period, and cheap surplus ammo is not readily available as it was in the past. So, other weapond are a better deal than the Garand, but for US history, it is hard to beat the garand. Those are my basic points.

RE the Mausers,
41 and 42 were prime years. I have a few Czech mausers from that period and the machine work is excellent. I have a few pals who regularly hunt with 8mm 06 converted mausers and they make sweet sporters. Now they would be worth alot more unconverted, but hey - these guns were made in the millions and are not really all that rare, and a mauser rebarreled with a modern quality barrel can really be a tackdrive.

Pat
 
Pat,
There are powders and bullet weights for the Garand that are at top of book and will not harm the action; just as some powders and bullet combo's will. If I were a manufacturer in todays sue-happy society, I wouldn't reccomend it either. But the Garand owners know which powders are safe and which are not.

The grandson of the Garand, the M14 operated at 52000 cup and did not bend operating arms.

My real point is not to discourage anyone considering buying a Garand because of concerns about the operating arm or availability of ammo.
I'm pretty sure the Lake City arsenol is 1000 rounds for 190 bucks. Not bad for a relatively large military case and round.

And Cabellas and Cheaper than Dirt, etc etc always have it. Fed makes ball for it, as did PMC and Rem. Assume they still do.

btw- where do get 2600 fps for the 150 Ball 06? Pretty sure it's above 2700
.
Sound's like you and I will have to disagree about the Garand.
I loaded for all four of mine, ball and hunting ammo, and never had any harm to any action part. I lived in the Mojave then, and myself and many other 'Garand Boys' fired thousands of rounds.

From, "The Hunting Rifle by Jack O'Connor
"Along in the 20's there was much talk of long range machine gun barrages, the US Army adopted the M-1 version of the .30/06 cartridge for teh Springfield. It used a 172 gr boatail bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2,660 fps. This was a fine cartridge, very accurate and flat shooting, particularly at longer ranges. However, the recoil was a bit grim for many and it didn't work too well in the Garand. As a consequence we fought World War ll with the Garand and the M-2 cartridge, which for all practical purposes was the original .30/06 cartridge with a 152 grain flat base bullet at slightly stepped up velocity of 2,800 feet per second...."

(I can't quite recall, but I think the military listed the cartridge at something like 2,770 fps. But I've a bad memory.)

The point is the Garand is more than 200 fps faster, and in my opinion can be safely used with today's top loads, if, if, one first learns the few powders to avoid. This knowledge is common amongst Garand shooters. Any normal hunting ammo will work, but the enhanced performance ones should not be used.

If you still disagree with me I've decided not to jump over a cliff, pull the tail of the cat, or give the wild turkeys ex-lax. 'S OK man. You obviously are a gunny and know a lot. Bet we'd have fun shooting together.



I always kinda wanted a .303 but in a humorous way your concerns about Garand safety apply to mine for the .303 You can't load it up. And the Enfield chambered in .308 has the same rear locking lugs; brass is going to stretch.


munk
 
Oh, a little nugget. You've read C.E. Harris? You probably have- he's considered a expert on modern military small arms. He lists the M2 ball at 2750. (Gun Digest Treasury) What's funny is that at 800 yards it is outpenetrated by the .223 SS109

I like Harris a lot. He makes military rifles interesting. Reminds me of the late Ian Hogg in a lot of ways.

munk
 
The funny thing is Munk, I don't think we disagree on the garand. :) It is a great rifle and a fine shooter. There is just a tendancy here in the states to pooh-pooh other calibers that I think is not deserved. Also, there are better deals than the M-1 at the urrent prices. If M1s were in the $250 range that the numbers prodiced would indicate, I'd havea casefull. The way things are, I'll probably get two to set aside for the kids someday, and fill the rest of the case with eless expensive but quality mausers and enfields.

Re #'s - the M2 #'s I had are from an article I believe by Gary James. They were Chronod #'s IIRC, not actual spec. There was another article that chronod the PMC ball at 2400. Eek. Maybe it is just lawyerphobia, but I respect Walk Kuleck at Fulton. the guy knows garands inside/out.

my other point was that though the M2 load is faster, the biullets are 25 to 50 grains lighter that the 303 or 8mm service loads. At the same weights, all three calibers can drive a bullet considerably faster than 2800.

Ed Harris is a genius - shame he doesn't write professionally anymore.

Pat
 
They were in the 250 dollar range when I had mine, and I sure wish I still had one.

Did you get my email?

Anyway, when I first looked into guns, I saw there was this group of people in the middle who would always get a .44 mag and a .30/06.
Always.
So my first handgun was a .41 mag. First rifle a .308 (I didn't reload for the308, and thought the 150 gr range would do fine if I ever hunted deer. I remember Gary Halbrook, a very fine man and gunsmith, turned red over that decision. The 06 is more versatile, but the 308 more accurate.

Own them both today. I even have a 44 mag. (course I own Four 41's....)

That's very true what you said about bullet weight.
I like the heavier, slower bullet loadings. As OConnor said of that 172 grain 06 at only 2660, it did very fine at the longer ranges. (where the higher BC and sectional density matter.) The Brits were smart, as were the Swedes, the Spanish...just about everyone except the USA

When did CE Harris stop writing? That's disapointing. I stopped buying gun annuals, and lost track of him. He made things fun. He compared the SKS once to the AK, and gave the nod to the SKS for those considering between the two. But there was a gleeful looking Harris shooting a full auto AK on the same page.

I miss Dean Grennel (sic?) too

munk
 
Munk,
I just check my email - nothing there yet. The address in my profile is correct though.

Dean passed, right?
Ed Harris is still around, though. He did a few short articles for an online mag out of Finland, but quit writing professionally 'cause he said he was sick of the manufactureres always trying to sell the latest thing, and tired of bozos at the range hassling him while he was trying to work. IIRC, he sold nearly all his guns and became the emergency manager for a small county government somewhere back east. One of the few guns he kept was a tricked out Enfield :)

Here's linky for ya
http://guns.connect.fi/gow/ed.html

I got a few of his articles set aside on disk as well. One mentions case life in the Enfield improvements if you neck size only. I ran across him on an online reloading forum awhile back as well.

Munk,
any differences aside, I am sure that we'd have a ball at the range. :)

Regards,
Pat
 
RE the heavier bullets - that is where the 30-06 really begins to shine, IMO. the larger case size lets you load bullets larger than either the 303 or the 8mm.

If you are an Ed Harris fan ... Have you read any of Whelan Townsend's writing? Col. Townsend could write, and he was very much the 30-06 man. Quite the adventurer as well. I read his book "Mr Rifleman" a few years back and loved it.

Pat
 
OK, according to Ian Hogg and John Weeks in their Military Small Arms of the Twentieth Century, the US M1 .30 cal. ball round is a 174 grain bullet over a 50 grain charge giving 2650 fps muzzle velocity. The US M2 .30 cal. ball round is a 150 grain bullet over a 50 grain charge giving 2500 fps. The British .303 cal Mk 7 ball is a 174 grain bullet over a 36.5 grain charge giving 2400 fps. The German Army Ball 7.92X57mm round used a 178 grain bullet over a 45 grain charge for 2620 fps.

The German Army Ball and the US M1 Ball seem quite comparable, as do the British Mk 7 Ball and the US M2 Ball.
 
The US M2 .30 cal. ball round is a 150 grain bullet over a 50 grain charge giving 2500 fps. >>>>>>>> FullerH

Mr. Hogg has made one of his rare mistakes.
I've a respected gun encyclopedia type book which states the 44 magnum fires a projectile of Forty-four one hundreths of an inch.

It's great Harris enjoys the Enfield. The fastest cyclic rate of fire for any military bolt rifle. I've always wanted the 308 version, but what the heck, if you go Enfield, THE cartridge will always be .303 British.
Pat, I've neck sized several problem cartridge/gun combos. I usually neck size for accuracy in my hunting arms. Then you turn around and find hunting cartridges are to be full length re-sized to insure feeding during the critical moment of the hunt, the kill.

Now I want a tricked out Enfield too.

edit; I've found two sources for the 2700 fps 06 ammo, but am still trying to figure all this out,. Maybe Hogg is right, but there's another standard issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top