View Single Post
  #35  
Old 08-02-2019, 11:05 PM
kidthatsirish kidthatsirish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimthompson502002 View Post
The statement is, to be kind, nebulous and meaningless.

When no effort has been made to determine the i.d. of the powder, let along the actual pressure parameters, in fact, we are reminded there are reasons most folks now call this publication GUN COMIX, and regard what they spew as low strata advisories.

What in the blue blazes is an "IMR-appearing" propellant? IMR and others produce all sorts of extruded powders, and the "eye test", to real ballisticians like Ackley and Grinnell, is frankly somewhat shy of comical. More germane: ball powders are particularly difficult to identify visually. These "conclusions" are "based" ( and that's stretching the bee-Jee-Zuss HELL out of whole idea of logic, frankly ) upon criteria that are nonsense.

There's way too much phony baloney cautionary advice about M1 fodder, especially powder and bullets, and way insufficient examination of genuine criteria, and this has gotten weirder and weirder as the time when it was issued and shot daily all over the world becomes distant. Testing matters. Performance matters. Chronography matters. Visual first impressions are almost entirely guesses, and while they might provide a lead or framework leading to some kind of information, they are neither conclusions nor hard evidence.

"Winchester", by the way, is not the old firm in New Haven that used to make lever action rifles. That firm folded its stateside tent after years of misery, and the name is now owned by Browning, who once in a while exploits it. This is Olin, who owns that venerable name, and while I am not one of their stronger advocates, this ammo shows all signs of being way milder, overall, than any M2 or equivalent I have fired.

The Federal ammo is likewise far less likely to eventuate pressure incidents, and in fact at 100 meters shot more than a full inch BELOW other stand M2 ball. This isn't a bad thing, by the way, since the rifle operates fine, and there's no particular need to hit paper especially hard to "kill" it. The milder loads reduce fatigue on rifle and shooter.

But sometimes, what passes for data is merely crackpot confabulations and foolish sidetracks.

By the way, the M1's conversion to caliber .30 U.S. Model of 1906 ammunition took place before M2 ball existed, when the standard projectiles were in the 173-grain range.

Well stated.

Furthermore, I think it would be dang near impossible to damage a well lubricated properly functioning rifle with a 150 grain bullet leaving the barrel at or below 2800 fps.regardless of the powder being used, the light bullet just isn't in the barrel log enough to let port pressure build that high I think.
Reply With Quote