is there a universal pet load so to speak for M1A? 11 twist barrel you know a load that just seems to work in most of them that you tried in. picked one up today and will be the first time I've loaded for one and just finding a starting point. powders at first pop in my mind 4064, varget, 8208, 748 .. and like a 155 Sierra Palma match bullet. Sierra 168 mk or a Hornady 168 match.. once people who's loaded for these think ?

From Glenn Zediker’s white paper on the M-14.

thanks !! PM returned

4895, for some reason has never ever given the accuracy I wanted in any of my M1a’s.

My go-to load in any M1a I shoot is 41-42 grains of IMR-4064 behind a 168 SMK. If that doesn’t do it, scrap the rifle and move on.

Carried an M-14 a long time ago and dearly love it.

My current M1a has a National Match wood stock, a Harris (Harris- McMillian?) match barrel, TRW internals and was reworked by folks at the AMTU at Ft Benning an hour and a half north of me. Before that it was involved in a murder/suicide and sold later to me by our Sheriffs Department. 😳 She puts all of her shots in nickel sized groups at 100. Mean little girl

41.5gr IMR 4895 under 168gr SMK was the "standard" when I started.

41.0gr IMR 4064 under 175gr SMK became my 600yd load.

The barrels I had would shoot anything well enough at 200 so Speer 125gr TNT gave a little less recoil for sitting rapid.

Good luck!

haven't shot any yet but last night I loaded 40.5 grains h4895 and a 168 Hornady match.

would be very interested in data for 125 TNTs because I have a few thousand of them on hand.

I'll see if I can find my old notes.

tag

Found this in an old score book from the last match I shot with my last M1A.

42.0grs H4895 under 125gr TNT.
Checked a old Sierra manual and that's like a half grain under starting load.

It must have had enough pressure to operate the gun though.

The last date in that last score book was 1999 so things may have changed some.

YMMV (a lot!)

thanks

You need to be mindful of powders. Coming from the Garand I only load IMR4895.
I suggest that you do some research on the M1a.
No sense bending the op rod with the wrong powder.
Check out the CMP forums.

In what type of brass?

that was in Canadian military brass marked IVI that load proved to have some cycling issues I'm not sure if it's from too hot (2760) or the brass switch the same load to LC match brass and it was a little lower on velocity and no issues but higher velocity than I was looking for. I settled on 39.5 H4895 LC match that ran around 2525 with the 168 Hornady.

and look like a good place to start fine tune from here



now that I found the velocity / pressure range it seems to like I loaded up some more experimentals five at a time at first with 748, 8208, and then some 125 TNTs with IMR 4895 and some Berger 155.5 again with H4895 have to let the wind quit blowing and get the time to shoot them and see what they do..

get a good optic mounted up this thing might shoot

yes H 4895 seems to be the common followed closely by the IMR version..
depending on which source you use using the different slightly but use nothing slower burning than 4064 on one source or Sierra is saying 4320...

I have no experience with IVI brass. I would never have thought 40.5 grains of H4895 would get a 168 going as fast as 2760. Too hot in that brass IMO.

I've been doing some chrono testing lately comparing the Hornady 168 bthp and the 168 Sierra Match King. The rifle is a Rem 40X with a generously throated 7.62 NATO spec chamber in its 27" barrel. In SIG brass loaded with 42 grains of recent production IMR 4064 the Hornady produced 2630 fps while the Sierra produced 2600. Nothing is free, so the Hornady is quite likely generating more pressure. Something to keep in mind if you're referencing classic M1A loads which used Sierras more often than not.


What speed did that LC brass produce with 40.5?

The old Lake City M852 match (as loaded with the IMR 4895 of the time and 168 grain Sierras) was spec'd at 2550+/- 30 fps at 78 feet, which corresponds to 2600 +/- 30 fps MV.

A lot of guys just take the powder charge for the heaviest bullet they shoot & apply it to all the lighter ones.

What speed did that LC brass produce with 40.5?

if I remember correctly it was 80 ft per second slower than the IVI
but I will look at my notes when I get home and get back on that correct answer

When I get back to the house for lunch I'll try to dig up some chrono data for comparative purposes.

Rem 700 5R Milspec, 24" barrel:

LC15 brass, CCI 200 primer, 41.5 gr IMR4895, 168 Hornady bthp, Vavg= 2566 fps for 17 shots
I also found 40.5 gr H4895 to be very good in the 5r, two 10 shot groups were sub-moa (thrown charges), didn't find chrono data on that one

Starline brass (heavy like LC), CCI 200 primer, 39 gr IMR3031, 168 Hornady bthp, Vavg= 2566 fps for 10 shots

LC67 Match brass, CCI 200 primer, 39 gr IMR3031, 168 Hornady bthp, Vavg= 2548 fps for 5 shots



Rem 700 XCR CT, 20" barrel:

LC15 brass, CCI 200 primer, "41.85" gr IMR4895, 168 Hornady bthp, Vavg= 2514 fps for 5 shots (The charge weight was an average of thrown charges.)

I forgot to mention I shot the same load with the Hornady in another rifle, a Rem 700 XCR LRT with a 26" barrel. Its chamber/throat is tighter than the one in the 40X and is, of course, a different barrel altogether. Even though it gave up an inch of length, the XCR barrel spit them out 55 fps faster.

These averages came from two tests of twenty shots fired over an Oehler 35P so I believe they're reliable.

The chamber/throat in your rifle may be helping to build pressure with lower charges. Of course component lots vary, but I've shot many lots of H4895 through many 308 rifles and the speeds you're seeing would get my attention.

okay I may have misspoken on my first velocity.
41.5 grains H4895 yielded 2670 FPS in an IVI case
40.5 grains of H 4895 yielded 2570 FPS in an IVI case
39 grains H4895 yielded 2500 FPS in an IVI case

all these above were with a Hornady 168 BTHP match cci 250 (I'm trying to conserve my br2's and I do not have any 34)

39 grains of H4895 yielded 2410 FPS in LC match brass.
39.5 grains h4895 yielded 2525 FPS in LC match brass
according to Hornady number 10 manual 308 Winchester service rifle section. the 39 grains in an LC match case is pretty close to data but the other half a grain is making way too much difference I'm wondering if I miss wrote something in the 39.5 was supposed to be 40.5.
making a note to myself to double check that...
but there is a definite pattern of the ivi cases shooting extremely hot and I've done some research on last night and it seems to be a pattern reading about that case..

I'm going to shoot some more stuff I made last night to see what comes up..

my shooting stuff tonight I could not chronograph I got done with chores too late and getting too dark. but I'm going to do some running with 8208, AA 2495, and tack, maybe 748.

for the most part I enjoy experimenting and learning after all the shooting range is less than 50 ft out My back door..

It's been posted a few times on this thread, and I'll post it again. If there's a universal load for M14 type rifles, it's one of the 4895's (IMR or H) under a 168 Sierra Matchking lit by a Fed 210M. During the heyday of the M14 in Service Rifle Competition, this was the load to beat. M852 Standardized it. If I were to pick a second and third choice of powders, I'd look at IMR4064, it's what FGMM most often used, then RE15 which is what was loaded in the later iterations of M118LR. (FYI, 4064 caused the most case stretch in my experience). The arsenals loaded to match the pressure spec making universal charge weights not very useful. Powder lot burn rates varied so charge weights varied to match. Between 40.5 and 41.5 is generally where you should be for IMR4895. You have the luxury of loading to accuracy for your rifle.

Second choice of projectile? 175 MatchKing. Some were playing with the 155 Palma MatchKing. I didn't have luck with that one. My theory was the bearing surface was too short for the 22" barrel. Hornady 168, I didn't have luck back in the day...but I did have great results with a prototype A-max. Hornady upped their game in recent years, so your luck might be better than mine with the Red boxes.

You also mention you like to experiment; you can look at VV N540, N135, N140 and Varget in addition to what's already been mentioned. You can go lighter on bullets, but you don't want to go much heavier than 175, unless you have a good supply of parts. Some folk I know played with WW748, but they complained about inconsistency when the temps rose.

The first thing that's jumping out to me is the 2760 number. If that's fps with a 168gr bullet, you're very likely waaaay hot.

Something to consider with surplus brass is if it was shot in machine guns. If that IVI is machine gun brass, they're probably expanded more that what you'd want for reliable cycling in an M14 type chamber.

Where's Nez when you need him?

He fixed that to 2670 in a later post. Still on the hot side for me.

thus far my limited endeavor into this rifle is pointing toward what you have said right here whether it both be actual or lots of hours of research. except one thing. I read it two different places I believe it is one response that has been worded like absolute. do not use federal primers because of the slam fire issues and possibilities..
but in the world of firearms I have never seen anything with the internet became a lie that has been absolute LOL thank you for the information I will take all the information and experience and absorb it the best I can..

I do need to go get some 168 Sierras to run with 4895 to set a base that seems to be pretty universal with all information I have found. I got 168 hornadys namely because of hornadys were $35 a 100 and Sierras $50 a 100.
yeah the first post about what I was finding I was running off of memory that'll teach me to do that LOL
one thing I am learning this rifle design runs correctly off of fairly narrow window of parameters in pressure and powder.

ChrisF,

My experience parallels yours with 4064. I first started using 42.0 grs under 175gr SMK with new IMI brass and quickly dropped it to 41.0 gr.

Never tried the 155 Palma. Shot a lot of Speer 125 TNT at 200yd, I think I gained more with less recoil than the small loss in accuracy hurt.

Too many different barrels, chambers and differences in powder lots to say any one recipe was the "one" for all rifles.

I was not rolling in money so tended to keep things more on the safe side.

I got more mileage loading safe "good enough" loads and lots of them to practice/train as much as possible.

After saying all that, as soon as I legged out I parked the service rifles. My piss poor eyesight was a constant struggle with service sights and I welcomed longer sight radius and way more options that came with the match rifles.

It's good to be cautious loading for the M14. Yes, the Fed 210M's were used with the possibility of slam fires. They were supposed to be more sensitive (Lee used to insert a caution in their instructions about NOT using 210M's in their tray fed priming tool because of the possibility of "sympathetic detonations", where if a primer goes off while seating it, the primers in the tray could also go off from the shock.

I and others used them knowing the warnings (I've never seen anything formally stated btw). One question I asked myself is "how did Federal load their highly regarded GMM with their primers safely?" I did reduce my risk of a slam fire in the other places where I could. I cut the primer pockets so that primers seated proud were not a possibility. I also sized my cases to below chamber headspace to try to minimize the risk of an OOB detonation (little different but related problem).

for all the knowledgeable folks here answering questions M1A specific has anybody played with XBR 8208 powder seems to me it ought to work good I've got it sitting there but haven't tried anything yet. and I was reading accurate 2495 was said to be very close if not the same or at least one time to one of the 4895? and was fairly popular in some circles for usage.

...leftovers from my 30 cal days;

You're probably a generation late to the party with that question. There's not as big a pool experimenting with the M14 as when it was the primary platform for Service Rifle Competition. Try searching the M14 forum for info on the newer powders and bullets.
https://www.m14forum.com/

Mike, you still get out to Butner? Is Pete Hodge and John Broughton still around?

8208 sits between 3031 and the 4895s on a chart I found from Hodgdon/IMR. That suggests to me it would be fine if approached carefully.

okay I just now reloaded and reshot through a chronograph 40.5 grains of H 4895 to see if I wrote in error. 2624 is what I got from this that's running a bit over a hundred feet per second faster than Hornady list that Hornady also used Hornady cases so that would drop that a grain to 39.5 which I shot the other day at 2525 so that sounds right to me now.

the more stuff I shoot and the more I experiment with it's gun seems to be shooting a bit faster than publish data would reflect across the board..
an interesting note 40.5 of IMR 4895 which one would believe would be at least close to the velocity of H 4895 there's only shooting 2550 75 ft per second slower than the H version. but also interesting it would not cycle the action...

How did 40.5 group?

it's really windy out here right now and I'm just shooting metal but at a hundred meters and a inch & half this is all with open sights

Nope, haven't been since around 2003 or so.

Last I heard Pete is doing ok, used to run into a NCNG pilot buddy of his on occasion.

I didn't see John much for a few years before I had to quit.

Triggernosis, a member here was shooting Butner fairly recently. He may have more recent info on NSSC doings. Butner was/is a great KD range!

42.5 of AA2520 is a great M1A load with a 168/175.

The garand isn't as powder sensitive as the internet led us to believe.

The 14 is similar... You won't be bending an oprod due to powder... you tweak them due to lack of lubrication.

One of my projects a few months ago was to develop a good 308 win load using first 168gr Sierra MKHP and then the Hornady 168gr match HP. Granted I'm in Iowa and it took three range sessions in January to arrive at 42.5grs H4895 with these weights loaded in Federal 308 Win brass for 2700fps from a 26" barrel single shot, or 2480fps from a 16" semiautomatic. This load is a maximum load, but the most useful since I was hoping for 2500fps from the shorty, but this is close enough. I tried a few incremental loads such as 42.7, and 42.8, but I actually got lower velocity readings, so I backed off to 42.5 as my maximum useful load in an AR platform. I don't have an M1A, but given what I've seen this load should be safe enough in an M1A. If I were using military brass then it should be decreased.

It also appears Hornady is trying to beat Sierra at their own game with the 168 HP match bullet. The Hornady's are ever so slightly longer for a bit more B.C. and run a bit faster over the screens. Accuracy is almost equal with a very slim edge to the Sierras. The Hornady tested sub 1/2 MOA for 5 shots at 100yds from my 26" heavy barrel test platform

I did a bit of shooting this afternoon and here's what I found for comparison purposes:

Remington 700 XCR CT 20" barrel 308 Winchester
LC15 brass
CCI 200 primer
Hornady 168 bthp seated to 2.8" overall length
41.5 gr. H4895
2617 fps

Sounds like a great load. If I sub in Sierras instead Hornady's I found velocity decreased a little. I think the Hornady's have slightly less bearing surface.

I found a similar increase with the Hornady in my 40X:

What's your source for this statement?

The convention of "no slower than IMR4064" and no heavier than a 175gr bullet has been around well before the internet has been thing. Those convention came out of the arsenals, and from military teams firing more rounds that any of us will ever see. I know of people who "poked the bear" experimenting and paid the price.

Hornady's been chasing Sierra for a long time now. Back in the 50's, Sierra produced their 168 International...and Hornady decided they needed a 168 too (as did Speer). At least they used a slightly different secant ogive versus the Sierra's tangent ogive.

Back in the late 70's-early 80's, when Lake City was fielding a new match 7.62 round, they tested the various flavors of 168ish bullets including the 168 Hornady and the Lapua D46. In the end, they found that the 168 Sierra's shot tighter on average and the Sierra's were selected for the M852 Match rounds.

Hornady to their credit has continued to push the development envelope with newer and better designs. ie A-Max, ELD, etc.