Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Competitive Shooting Gun Show FA match brass

My Dad just won't stop buying guns, grabbed an IHC Garand last year, and a couple months ago a 1903. I don't think he's got any civilian 30-06s.

So this weekend, in scrounging for Garand clips (got some) there was also a good amount of once-fired CMP brass on one table, two bucks for 20 or 10 cents a case. Deprimed, nothing else. I went ahead and got 100 cases with an FA 61 Match headstamp. At the worst, I suppose I could mount those to a chunk of wood for a coat rack, but I fully intend to deep-clean, anneal, size, trim, load and shoot.

Am I nuts? Suicidal even to shoot one? Anyone know if the original primers were corrosive?

I have GI brass from the '30s and some FA from the same period as yours. Shoots fine & is very tough.
I believe FA was NC by the 60's.

It was the older mercuric primers that could embrittle brass.

I take it back, they were deprimed and sized, looks like. Pretty good looking stuff once I tumbled it for a while, the coloration from the factory annealing is still quite distinct, and there's no sign they were fired more than once, only one ejector ding on each, meaning they were shot through a Garand.

Chamfered the case mouths and primer pockets, checked for length and only needed to trim about 12 out of 100.
The necks are sized to 301 which seems sort of aggressive to me, so when I prime them, I will run a sizing ball in and out as well. That should kind of "tell" if the brass is cooked by mercury, if I get splits there or if they don't feel like annealed brass should when being sized. If they drive hard on the ball, but don't split, I'll stop short and anneal the cases, THEN re-size the necks.

Mathman got it. No mercuric primers by then. They went out of style 50 years before that brass was made. Simple corrosive priming (which was also no longer used by FA in '61) is not injurious to brass in the least. I'm using a small batch of FA-32 brass (which was definitely corrosive primed) that's holding up as well as stuff 80 years younger than it is.

Regurgitation of a little primer history: the old #FA-70 primers, used for all gov't .30 ammo from long before WWII until well into the 50's was corrosive as hell, but utterly harmless to the gun if simple cleaning protocols were followed after firing. It was kept in use long after foreign powers like Germany had switched their priming compounds to non-corrosive, as well as U.S. commercial ammo makers. Why? Because it was an extremely stable primer (a useful trait when troops are engaged under all conditions globally), didn't go bad after long term storage, and a very uniform primer which equates to accuracy. Lots of knowledgeable handloaders and benchrest shooters clung tenaciously to the FA-70 primer until gov't surplus supplies of them dried up. I still have a couple packs to use sometime but they're probably worth more to a collector now.

Regardless, you got your hands on some of the best '06 brass ever made. I know loonies who would creep your house tonight if they knew you had some laying around! I treasure the couple hundred pieces of FA Match brass I have and use it sparingly.

As with any old(ish) brass, annealing is a good idea anyway.

I obtained a large supply of 61 FA Match once fired. I was told that this brass is softer than a lot of the other Match brass. So far, I haven't completely gone through one round of 'load and shoot', so I cannot address whether that is true or not. A word to the wise, though....I am going to watch mine closely and maybe you should as well.

I shoot a lot of SL 43 06 brass in my 03's & 03A3's still. I don't use higher pressure loads in it but still use it and have a big pile of LC 54 to use if I last that long.

I ran the ball through the necks and primed them last night on my 650. HDY tapered ball, felt "about right" with very little variation or sticking, springy but not hard-feeling. Pockets are firm with CCI 200s LR primers, seating was stiff but very consistent.

I think I got a pretty good deal on these. Depends on how they do on firing but I don't expect any issues. If that guy shows up at the next gun show, I'll try to get another hundred, either more 61s or something else "match." My Dad has both a Garand and a 1903, so another headstamp is just to stay organized. Nonetheless, I can tell these cases came from a rifleman's stash, not the junk dealer. Thanks for the advice.

It ought to work pretty well. I bought some 60's vintage LC Match and National Match for 308 and it has been good stuff.

When you measured the "neck holes" at .301" were you using a proper inside mic or gauge pins?

Neither. Just a small finger caliper. Reads 303 now. When I bought them, I had no clue they'd been resized, just deprimed. They chamber a little more freely than I'd like but I'm not going to mess around with a false shoulder or loading long. I'll just feel for a ring after firing.

You did well to pass them over the Hornady elliptical ball. They're probably a little bigger than .303" due to the way the little caliper jaws fit in round holes.

Which LC load do you want to mimic?

Actually, Math, I'm looking for baby loads more than match loads, although I'd like a suggestion for Garand over H 4895. So, glad you asked.

But this is for my Dad, who is 86 and getting a little brittle. He needs something soft shooting, two needs.
1. A load just enough to cycle the Garand properly and still group well. If there is something with quality 125s and another faster powder, even SR? But "mild Garand" is enough. He can handle the Federal Garand 150 load okay..

2. Sissy reduced loads for a Springfield 1903, million-number receiver.. Kind of like Blue Dot loads for a 30-06 that will group nicely on 100 yard paper without kicking the snot out of him. 100, 110, 125 grainers. A good powder recommendation would be appreciated.

If 4895 is preferred, I found 40 grains of same and either a 150 or 165 to be a very pleasant light kicker, and accurate in several rifles. Sorry i can't speak to it functioning a Garand but would think it should. It is the load I use to tame a 6 3/4 pound Mauser guild gun with a stupid narrow butt stock that is absolutely murderous with factory equivalent loads. 100 yard groups with 40 4895/165 Sierra out of two Springfields consistently slop into 1- 1 1/4", sub-MOA out of the 1903A1 USMC sniper with Unertl scope.

As for 60 year old FA Match brass being soft, after dancing with FA stuff of that vintage off and on for the last 50 years I can honestly say I never noticed that trait. Back when I was anal about such things I remarked that FA Match brass of the same lot was scary consistent regarding case volumes, measured with the water/weight thereof method. I have some FA Match brass that is on its 8th loading with no signs of impending retirement. (But mind you I don't load any of it anywhere near max. What's the point?)

Funny, back in the day the main reason we glommed onto Match brass was because we didn't have to remove crimps, not because it was particularly uniform.

holy cow, I need to start selling my FA match brass, have buckets of 59

49gr of 4895 and any 125gr bullet you can find is about the most pleasant load ever for an M1. And very accurate. Any half way decent M1 can easily hold the 10 ring of an SR with that. I'd use it in the '03 too. It's the same load that is normally used with a 150.

You might be able to work down a few grains from that, but this has functioned every M1 I've shot it in.

Please keep them coming. I'm going to wait until this thread dies and then copy the suggestions onto a cheat sheet I can check against a load manual so I den't get too far off book.

30/06 loads were figured out a long time ago. Here's a bunch for the M1.
http://masterpostemple.bravepages.com/M1load.htm

For 125s, I (and a lot of other people) just use 150gr bullet powder charges. To get the minimum recoil, use a stick powder.

Tyrone and crew, I just clicked Tyrone's link and my Malwarebytes slapped me with a malware warning. Bummer, but be warned, Malwarebytes as protected my stuff pretty well.

Dang, it's such a simple page. Just one advert on it for hosting.

THanks for trying, Tyrone, but I've been wrecked a couple of times and it was ugly. In fact, I have double backup external drives and a spare, virgin computer. That's just cheaper than the alternative, not just in terms of dollars, but in lost time while the expert voodoo people do their thing. Such a shame something so wonderful can be so facking "dangerous." If I could shoot 30-06 back down the wires, oh, Gosh, would I!