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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-11-2012, 10:42 PM
Fishbed77 Fishbed77 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 37
Default Garand Gear Ported Gas Plug opinions?

Does anyone have any experience (good or bad) with the ported gas plug sold by Garand Gear?

http://www.garandgear.com/m1-garand/...-plug?sef=hcfp

They claim that is will work with both commercial and M2 Ball ammo without adjustment. Just curious if anyone has used them successfully.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-11-2012, 11:39 PM
lapriester lapriester is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cobb, N California
Posts: 10,862
Default

First, it's not "ported", it's "concaved". Second, in my experience, products that are claimed to be a universal solution to a known issue always give up something in the process. In this case it may be component longetivity. For that reason I, personally, wouldn't use one. They haven't been around long enough to know the long term effects on the rifle when shooting any commercial ammo you want through a Garand using one.

I'm not faulting the product, just stating the reservations I personally have concerning catch all solutions. It's just too easy to load, or have loaded for you, ammo for hunting or target that meets established Garand specific data that will never damage or shorten the life of critical components.

Larry

Last edited by lapriester; 06-11-2012 at 11:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-12-2012, 12:12 AM
Garandimal Garandimal is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 351
Default

Like them a lot.

Works fine w/ M2 ball (HXP) and plan to hunt w/ 180 grain Core-Lokts this fall.

As stated, it does not vent gas, so there is no loss of energized gas, ...and port to adjust, come loose, or plug.

It is, in essence, a low-compression head for the gas cylinder/system.

It is a simple, elegant solution to multiple, complex problems of variable bullet weight/powder charge/burn rate.

The R&D engineering supporting the product is copious, valid, and sound.

Shooting Commercial Ammunition in your M1 Garand

And, unless you have an Armorer to turn in your Rifle to, free of charge, when it starts to shoot loose?



GR
__________________
"...We know that it is the hits that count..."

Marine Major General William H. Rupertus - The Rifleman's Creed
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-12-2012, 12:14 AM
Mac O tac Mac O tac is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Wasilla, AK
Posts: 661
Default

OP, Ericc is in the process of performing additional testing utilizing a wider variety of commercial ammo than that currently listed in their performance data. I have been waiting to for test results to come in as I am sure many others are too. I have thoroughly reviewed the technical data that is currently on the website.

I respect Larry's concerns about it being a pretty new device that obviously does not have a long track record established. At first, it really threw me off when the website called it a "Ported Plug" Where is this "Port?" I think it is a terminology issue. The website establishes their difference between "Ported and Vented" If I got it wrong, I guess I am lost from square one. Larry, has never given me advice that was not sound.

Still, I am hoping their plug turns out to be the magic bullet that levels the playing field of .30-06 commercial ammunition for the Garand. Maybe after they complete this batch of variety testing they might decide to run a counted rounds fired test to determine when a component actually wears out or breaks; specifically, the Op Rod. The goverment used to do similar tests on all military firearms when competing for a design contract. For a number of reasons. I am convinced that if a major modification were to be done to the original design of the rifle to facilitate a wider variety of ammunition and extend rifle component service life. The Gas Cylinder Plug is the ideal component for modification. Like Garandimal mentioned "It is a simple, elegant solution to multiple, complex problems of variable bullet weight/powder charge/burn rate." If the testing results prove what I think they will. I would be using one of these plugs reguardless of the ammo I shoot in my Garands. This is based soley on the fact that they will prevent/decrease wear and tear on the rifle's original and vintage components without any noticeable difference in performance.

I am sure that testing such a device could get expensive. But, it could prove to be the best thing for the Garand since non-corrosive ammo became the standard. In as much, worth every penny spent.
__________________
In the 70s we would say "You can tune a piano but, you can't tuna a fish." Now that I am a little older, kinda retired, an Alaskan, and hopefully wiser for it. I consider it best to smoke my fish, and I can use the hickory wood from a brand new piano to do it

PING!

Last edited by Mac O tac; 06-12-2012 at 05:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-12-2012, 03:29 AM
jerryjeff jerryjeff is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 3,322
Default

I'm just going to throw this out. What would happen if someone were to really get serious about the M1 family and manufacture very tight tolerance gas cylinders and oprod pistons? Kind of like CNC versions of the gas parts.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-12-2012, 05:50 AM
HughUno HughUno is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 3,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garandimal View Post

The R&D engineering supporting the product is copious, valid, and sound.

GR
agree 100%. The design has (obviously) been extensively tested with some fairly sophisticated instrumentation.

also, from Eric's testing (and more to follow soon apparently) my long-standing (and much criticized) observations that a large percentage, if not a vast majority, of 30.06 commercial ammo IS in fact port-pressure safe/compatible with the USGI system already in place appear to be verified. This isn't all that surprising as when you break down commercial hunting ammo in the 150 to 180 grain range, they tend to (obviously) use extruded powders in the volume/weight ranges associated with powders considered "safe" (medium slow).

Eric's modified screw seems to be good value for those who plan on shooting a good bit and variety of various commercial ammo and don't want to worry about any risk to the operating rod (or maybe receiver heel). There are other ways to deal with this issue ranging from breaking down a round to measure powder volume compared to powder weight to simply shooting one round and observing how far the round is ejected. With Eric's screw, you can just 'fagetallaboutit.'

Last edited by precision40; 06-12-2012 at 10:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-12-2012, 11:30 AM
Gewehr43 Gewehr43 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 694
Default

OP:
I have a friend who bought one and is using it with good success and it seems to works quite well.

Hugh:
This question (of using commercial ammunition in a M1) has been going on long before you and I were born. Your, others and my thoughts on the matter have been already hashed out many times. I hope you aren't implying that you some how have contributed to answering this question in a meaningful way, because you haven't. Ericc has and done it in a positve and constructive way. Ericc's testing shows that 20-22% of the cartridges he tested so far exceeded the normal gas port pressures for an M1. He then suggests a solution to this problem. You on the other hand, thru out these various threads have demeaned and ridiculed any one who suggested any question or problem with shooting commercial ammo thru an M1.
To put in other words: Ericc's use (thankfully) of measureable and useful data is helpful and valid. You using rubber bands and just shooting ammo under endless variables and then declaring it safe, and then bitterly arguing the point- Not helpful or valid.

Last edited by Gewehr43; 06-12-2012 at 11:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-12-2012, 10:11 PM
tankerG tankerG is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Southern Arizona
Posts: 435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerryjeff View Post
I'm just going to throw this out. What would happen if someone were to really get serious about the M1 family and manufacture very tight tolerance gas cylinders and oprod pistons? Kind of like CNC versions of the gas parts.
My guess would be it won't happen. The gas system is designed to have a certain amount of play to accommodate thermal expansion, dirty field conditions, etc. And with several million USGI Garands out there, I don't think anyone will attempt it. Things works too well as it is.
Since companies like Columbus Machine will take your worn gas cylinders and hone them out, and then oversize the op rod piston to match it (and that operation can be done twice), there's no real need for an expensive, modern machined part. JMHO
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-13-2012, 07:02 AM
DetroitMan DetroitMan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerryjeff View Post
I'm just going to throw this out. What would happen if someone were to really get serious about the M1 family and manufacture very tight tolerance gas cylinders and oprod pistons? Kind of like CNC versions of the gas parts.
Respectfully, I don't see how that would resolve the issue. If you made the op rod strong enough to withstand higher pressure ammunition, the problem would just transfer down the line and we would start seeing cracked receiver heals.

Adjustable gas systems are an old and proven solution on post-WWII military automatic rifles. What I would really like to see is an M1 ported gas plug that can be adjusted without tools. It would be even better with click presets or marks for certain levels. The user could simply dial it in for their ammunition, using the ejection pattern to determine where the correct setting is. Aside from this ideal, I think Ericc's solution is an excellent one. It's simple and no-fuss, and his test data is excellent. It opens up a lot of options in commercial ammunition and saves wear-and-tear on the rifle.

Last edited by DetroitMan; 06-13-2012 at 07:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-14-2012, 10:36 AM
eldo eldo is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 88
Default

I used to switch back and forth between a Shuster adjustable plug and a GI screw when switching between HXP, hand loads and commercial ammo.

For the last 900 rounds (mostly 150gr commercial) or so I've ran the Garand Gear Ported Gas Plug for simplicity's sake.

Regardless of the ammo I'm using, the documented low compression head concept behind Eric's plug is saving wear and tear on my Garand.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:31 PM.