Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > M1 Carbine
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 09-08-2010, 07:07 AM
.Steve. .Steve. is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 858

I wish all the data and info matched, even with Hodgdon internally in their own data and ball powder recommendations. The largest problem with carbine data is that you can find just about any load you wish to find. Whether they are any good or not, is another question. And watch out for the 20" test barrels versus actual carbines being fired for data. The carbines are slower in velocity for the same load.

Some months ago I made up test batches of WW296 loads with 110 grain FMJRN Remington bulk bullets from Midway using mixed cases and WSR primers. The amount of powder was other than 15.0 grains. I was interested in accuracy, action function, and point of aim/point of impact differences compared with the ancient WW data load of 15.0 grains.

WW296 loads using 14.85 grains, 14.75 grains, and 14.5 grains were fired. The accuracy was identical in terms of 10 shot group size. The action function was identical, i.e., zero malfunctions with hundreds of rounds. The point of impact/point of aim was identical at 200 yards, or close enough I could not tell there was a difference in group centers for 10 shot groups for the 14.85 and 14.75 grain loads. It is possible the 14.5 grain load was lower by an inch or two, but I am not sure.

The "feeling" of the carbines was that the action was being functioned crisply and operating correctly. Brass was ejected normally and to the same locations. The sounds were the same shot to shot and load to load.

WW296 loads using 14.0 grains were also fired simply because some guys say they use them. I stopped shooting the test batch within the first few targets because the actions were being operated sluggishly with one shot and crisply with the next shot. The sounds were different one shot to another. With plugs and muffs both, differences in sound were apparent with what was getting through the hearing protection. The WSR primers were not consistently lighting the WW296 where there was extra room in the case as a guess.

The WW296 14.5 grain loading seems perfectly adequate, but then again it was my carbines firing it, not yours, so who can say with your gun. I recommend nothing. The above is simply a report of what seems to work and not work. (Yeah, slickie lawyer talk.)
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM.