M14 Forum


What is the M1 capable of with a scope?

This is a discussion on What is the M1 capable of with a scope? within the M1 Garand Accuracy forums, part of the Rifle Forum category; The vast majority of accuracy reports and projects involve CMP regulations for the M1. I'm interested in what the M1 can do with optics. I ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > Rifle Forum > M1 Garand Accuracy


Like Tree94Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old November 25th, 2012, 06:37 PM   #1
Snappin In
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 24
What is the M1 capable of with a scope?

The vast majority of accuracy reports and projects involve CMP regulations for the M1.

I'm interested in what the M1 can do with optics.

I realize that a rifle that is inherently inaccurate remains that way even with the best glass.

Does anyone here want to share what their rifle does with a scope?
100 yards? 200 yards? 600 yards?

I'm especially interested in rifles that don't meet CMP regulations for a match.

Thanks,

Garrett


Last edited by Blindeye; November 26th, 2012 at 03:20 PM.
Blindeye is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 25th, 2012, 06:40 PM   #2
Automatic Rifleman
 
meterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: young harris Ga.
Posts: 137
are you talking about a garand or a carbine

meterman is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 06:42 PM   #3
Old Salt
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,389
Id bet a probably set up M1 could ring steel at 1000yds with glass. It's little brother M14 can, no reason why the M1 can't.

Thanks from GARRARD, nf1e@snet.net and selon50
Jason0839 is online now  
Old November 25th, 2012, 06:50 PM   #4
Automatic Rifleman
 
meterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: young harris Ga.
Posts: 137
That inherenitly inaccurate pharse kinda confused me .The m1garand is the most accurate semi auto platform made maybe not the lighest but deffinatly the most accurate,and with glass there awesome

Thanks from nf1e@snet.net, selon50 and Dredsen
meterman is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 07:07 PM   #5
Platoon Sergeant
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ohio
Posts: 349
They are very, very accurate with glass on them. I will get one of my mounts and my rack grade IHC up and going here in the next week or two, and let you know how she does. I have scope lots of them for guys with my over the center line of the bore mount, and they shoot very very well. When I mag fed the IHC, it was shooting about MOA, but its a racker so it could be better with a better barrel I am sure.

losok is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 07:09 PM   #6
Banned Camp
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,779
I've seen guys shooting 1000 yard matches with iron sights on a Garand, so a scope would only enhance its abilities.

slayer6769 is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 07:35 PM   #7
Lifer
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alabama, God's Country
Posts: 3,209
The "C" is my favorite... about MOA, with LC M72 MATCH ...

I'm sure a more modern scope will do better, but I like the classic...

JWB
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_1040_small.jpg (32.6 KB, 43 views)

Thanks from nf1e@snet.net and selon50
jbrooks is online now  
Old November 25th, 2012, 08:38 PM   #8
Lifer
 
Bamban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,187

Awards Showcase

I never shot my McCoy built M1 with optics, but testing it with irons from the bench it shot every bit as good as any of my match conditioned gas guns.

The picture below is a close up of the picture I posted in the thread about 140 Noslers. 140 grain Nosler CC I took the picture up side down so you can see the labels, was careless when pasting and labeling holes. You will see that the pasters in the middle say M1 MM 185, these are Mexican Match from 82 M118 pulling the 173s and dropped the 185 Berger HPBT LRs. The ammo was first tested at 200, and they shot great at that distance, so when I got done testing and verifying the short line ammo at 300 as I showed in the 140 Nosler thread, I verified the MM at 300. The first 2 shots were side by side just outside the 10 riing, clicked and fired 2 more - in the X ring side by side. That was enough for me for validation, the ammo is GTG for 600 yards.

Bottom line, the M1s can shoot, not sure if I could have done better with optics.


The backside of the target showing the holes.

Thanks from Phil McGrath and GARRARD
Bamban is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 03:41 AM   #9
Master Gunner
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 912
I am a bit confused about the "with glass" part. Despite what most people think, at 200 yards or less there is and should not be ANY difference in "accuracy" (group size) between scopes and iron sights (assuming a good prone-match or bench shooter). I guarantee that at 100 or 200 yards, given the same exact rifle and ammo with and then without a scope (off a bench and rear bag anyway!), my groups would be the same (or smaller) than yours.

Even at NRA Long Range matches, the scores at Camp Perry between the scoped classes and iron sight shooters at 1000 yards are closer than you think. (like around 2 INCHES if you were to compare "group" sizes and not scores--best I recall anyway)

Also, the statement (above) [QUOTE= meterman [/QUOTE] about "The m1garand is the most accurate semi auto platform made maybe not the lighest but deffinatly the most accurate,and with glass there awesome" is patently untrue. While I have at least a half-dozen M1's (including both a Fowler .06 and Leisinger .308 match rifles--and have owned MANY more over the years), there was (and is) a GOOD reason that military match and then civilian match shooters switched over to M14/M1A in the 60's and then AGAIN to ARs in the late 80's/early 90s. Each time, the scores in matches dropped significantly. The M1 is "heavy" because it is (comparatively) COMPLICATED. It doesn't bend, twist, and stretch like an AK!, but it isn't nearly as rigid when fired as an M14 (or AR).

The M1 is a great rifle and can be made to shoot very well, but the M14/M1A out of the box OR tweaked will easily have the advantage over an M1 (and not just because of the .308 being a bit more accurate than the .06 round as a rule). Out of the box, I would expect a decent "stock" M1A to shoot match ammo pretty close to 1.5, maybe a bit less. Even a very nicely set up and assembled stock M1 (new/mint barrel, etc.) isn't likely to do nearly this well (more like 1.75 to 2.0). Likewise, the AR15 dominates the match firing line because it is not only easier to shoot it is more accurate than the M1A/308 rifles.

This is a 10 shot 100 yard group (using my "practice" match ammo) and I could (easily) repeat this (or BETTER with true match loads) pretty much forever with an AR (no scope of course).



Last edited by AKA Hugh Uno; November 26th, 2012 at 08:23 AM.
AKA Hugh Uno is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 04:23 AM   #10
Master Gunner
 
MesaRifle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 914
Reality sets in at the range....

I was initially a bit shocked regarding accuracy achievements with M1A/M14s when I first started reading this forum, esp. when I noted the various problems with the M1A platform. Specifically, it is a very asymmetrical platform, with an Op-Rod cycling out on it's right hand side, and the mounting of said rod also not being attached to the rest of the rifle mechanism in a totally solid way.

As well, the epoxy bedding is "unusual" to say the least, and the owner is then admonished to not disturb it too much, unlike the bedding on any bolt gun. I mean "solidly bedded" like when I build a target or sniper-style bolt gun, based let's say on an accurized Rem 700 action.

As well, though I thought, after nigh-on 45 yar, sonny, of careful reloading, I had it all down to a fine art, I come to find that the M14/M1 platform requires a whole new set of pretty strict rules to avoid having a slam fire or having your cheek blown off. Hardly a concern with a Rem700 or even an old Lee-Enfield Mk4 No1! Yikes!

All them ultra-tricky little measurements and tricky-like fiddle-fricking around just to have it fire safe and consistently??? How DID our military guys have these heavy, clumsy things work right out in the steamy 'Nam jungles I wondered.

When you read about the tricks necessary to add in to an M1A platform build in order to accurize it, and then you read that the usual "achieved" best average accuracy then being about 1.5" @ 100m best day, I was less impressed, since a good modern target bolt gun with carefully selected handloads firing match-grade .308 round with good bullets will always shoot into 0.5" with 5 shots, minimum, often better.

And so, as it's shipping arrival date here approached, I was getting increasingly more nervous about the new SA NatMatch I'd ordered, with it's special hand-selected Krieger SS heavy match bbl and other dedicated improvements, incl. a great two-stage match grade trigger, special high resolution iron sights, epoxy bedding and oversized stock.

Well, it turns out my v. conservative load of AA2520 powder and No. 34 primer, produces a reduced but very consistent and reliable load of 2700 fps 30 or so fps, and is v. carefully tailored with the right headspace, partial neck sizing and overall length for my specific rifle's chamber.

Thus set up, it will indeed shoot those Sierra Match 155.5gr or 168 gr alternative Match boolitz, 5 of them, into a solid 1 to 1.2" group. Occasionally, it will drop 4 of them into 0.8", very respectable apparently, for this platform.

It's also a consistent shooter easily out at 400+ yards, the furthest I've shot it so far, producing a 3 shot 3.75" group, which was sadly blown a bit to the right by that infrequently and unpredictably gusty 12 - 14mph desert wind we get out here in central WA St, about 25 - 30 mi from the Yakima Firing Range. Btw: that highly variable wind was accurately gauged as to velocity and direction on my Kestrel wind meter.

Now, my own 45 yr old build match-grade "Sniper" rifle, in 6.5-06 Ackley Imp, will shoot from that full-on custom Rem 700, using those nice 140 gr Nosler hunting bullets, 5 of them, into about 0.5 - 0.65" @ 100 m, and will continue to group them that tightly out to 600+m. Generally, better than the SA NatMatch rifle can or will do. Those lovely 6.5s do fly v. well.

I'd love to see an SA NatMatch in 6.5 cartridge (the 260 Winchester for example). Less recoil to disturb the overall platform when discharged, and those 6.5s would fly further, faster and with better downrange performance, even on lost souls out @ 1000 m!

Btw, I have a Leupold Mk 4 6.5-24 F-F-plane TactMilReticle optic on the Rem 700, and "only" a Leupold VR-X 2 - 7X scope with illuminated center dot reticle, and a heavy tactical post (German No. 4) reticle on board the SA NM. A slight disadvantage @ extended ranges, but it's also v. easily seen in low light, unlike the Mk4 sniper scope.

So, bottom line: the SA M1A is not as accurate as my own straightforward (and old!; over 25 yrs since I built it!), but it's serviceable and workable as a sniper rifle for medium longish shots (I'd be comfy shooting at a high value target out to, say, 800 m, or a larger target out to 1000 m. No, not the best, since so much stuff is vibratin' about when you light a round off off, but still, they have worked a lot of technical tuning type miracles with it.

I'm also not entirely sure it's therefore as consistent under different field conditions (temp, altitude, load type, bullet weight variations, after the rifle starts to warm up, and so on) as the more simplified Rem 700 platform is.

Bottom line: the auto loading ARs and the new LMT 129A British version of Lewis Machine Tool's .308 type "AR10" style rifles [but far more technically evolved...] are more in-line in the basic M-16 design basics, and are capable of a more dedicated target/sniper build with concomitant accuracy advantages. As in: 5 shots into oh... 0.5 - 0.6" @ 100 m, and with linear advantages all the way out to, say, 800 - 1000 meters.

But still, the old M1A horse is such fun to ride into the shootin' sunset, no? I think so! May as well have fun, after all...


Last edited by MesaRifle; November 26th, 2012 at 04:37 AM.
MesaRifle is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 04:47 AM   #11
Platoon Commander
 
Wolley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South of Houston
Posts: 428
Probably because 99% of my shooting is with irons or match sights I always shoot tighter groups with them compared to scope shooting.
Before I realized this I used to strip the sights from my Palma rifle and mount the T36 to test loads. For some reason being able to see all of the movement in the rifle caused me to snatch shots and the groups were never tiny. So I stopped doing that and now test loads with the peeps mounted. Much better groups and consequently much better evaluation of loads.
I don't hunt but if I did I would still prefer a scoped rifle. Just not 36 power.

Wolley is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 10:37 PM   #12
Lifer
 
Phil McGrath's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Silverdale, WA.
Posts: 4,273

Awards Showcase

Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA Hugh Uno View Post
The M1 is a great rifle and can be made to shoot very well, but the M14/M1A out of the box OR tweaked will easily have the advantage over an M1 (and not just because of the .308 being a bit more accurate than the .06 round as a rule). Out of the box, I would expect a decent "stock" M1A to shoot match ammo pretty close to 1.5, maybe a bit less. Even a very nicely set up and assembled stock M1 (new/mint barrel, etc.) isn't likely to do nearly this well (more like 1.75 to 2.0). Likewise, the AR15 dominates the match firing line because it is not only easier to shoot it is more accurate than the M1A/308 rifles.
The M1 and the M14/M1A rifles have there own unique quirks most people with a mech understanding figure them out sooner or later if not they pay someone who does gunsmithing is never cheap you pay for what he knows and what he's done to your rifle, finding the old school guys that did the work needed back in the day is getting harder the M1/M14/M1A is not the current Service Rifle for the US armed forces.

The Ar/15 in one form or the other has been the US Service Rifle for the last 50 some years, its only been approved as a NRA Service Rifle sense 95/96?, anyway finding people that can do the work needed isn't that hard if the shooter can't do it themself.

Case in point have you priced what a complete upper costs from White Oak or Compass Lake? there not cheap or how about a trigger from Giesslie Automatics? Not cheap either, my point is the sport isn't cheap period no matter what you do, if you want too play and not be stuck in the basement your going too have too pony up some money.

Shooting is shooting use what you like best and have fun, I've heard all the arguements about what is best, and here is one that few Ar people understand a inside 9 with the .223/5.56 is still a inside 9, with a .30 its still a 10.

I like my rifles made from wood and steel from the 03a1 Springfield to the M14/M1A. The Ar's are fun as well and they have there place too. I think theres room on the firing line for both and it is the skill of the archer not the arrow, but nice arrows help.

Phil McGrath is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 03:12 AM   #13
Lifer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chesterfield, VA
Posts: 2,983
In my view the scope doesn't make the rifle more accurate.

It makes the shooter more accurate with the rifle. What I mean by this is that the use of a scope removes the issue of less than perfect eyes and sight alignment (front with the rear and front with the target). So using a scope can improve your shooting if you have the above issues. I do. My eyes are 55 years old now. They just don't focus on the front sight unless I have a nice sunny day going on.

I have a scout scope mount on my shooter M1 Garand with a 2X8 long eye relief scope on it and I LIKE IT!! It makes that M1 much more usable for me and I shoot the rifle pretty good. It is not a target rifle. It is not a match rifle. It is a fun rifle to shoot that shoots better than many folks believe till they see the groups or see the pop ups go down (head/shoulder shots at 400 yds) and I wouldn't hesitate to grab it if I needed a rifle to take care of a problem.

It shoots better than my M1A that I've had for over 30 years.

Say what you will about the varmint rifles. I own them. I shoot them. They are fun. I wouldn't hesitate to use mine on paper, pop cans, or varmints or in the house in the middle of the night if I felt the 1911 wouldn't get the job done. But I won't be grabbing the varmint gun for a problem outside the house. It'll be something that turns cover into concealment.

M1A's r BEST is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 03:37 AM   #14
Old Salt
 
jake2far's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,457
Perhaps these will shed some light on the arrow vs the bow vs the archer.
With training, good eyesight, and a proper fit, there should be no difference between scoped and iron sighted rifles.
The scope will allow for eyesight problems, and some training issues.
http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...mmunition.html
http://www.chuckhawks.com/affordable_accuracy.htm

There are 3 major factors in accurate shooting with one overriding everything else doesn't matter rule.
1. The weapons platform/proper equipment.
2. The ammunition.
3. Training.

All three are equal in importance, not one in this list exceeds the other in value.

It was described to me along time ago as this;
90% of shooting is mental, the other 10% is between your ears.
Most shooters try to compensate for performance issues with equipment and ammo, most equipment and ammo can out perform their ability. Training, proper training, with practice can make more improvements in group size and placement than any other.
The human body/mind combination makes for a very difficult platform to shoot from. The ability to replicate the exact same condition shot to shot is the great challenge. The weakest link in shooting is the mind to body support of the weapon. It is why we hold such high regard for the shooter.

Jim

Thanks from dwight55
jake2far is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 04:46 AM   #15
Automatic Rifleman
 
meterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: young harris Ga.
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA Hugh Uno View Post
I am a bit confused about the "with glass" part. Despite what most people think, at 200 yards or less there is and should not be ANY difference in "accuracy" (group size) between scopes and iron sights (assuming a good prone-match or bench shooter). I guarantee that at 100 or 200 yards, given the same exact rifle and ammo with and then without a scope (off a bench and rear bag anyway!), my groups would be the same (or smaller) than yours.

Even at NRA Long Range matches, the scores at Camp Perry between the scoped classes and iron sight shooters at 1000 yards are closer than you think. (like around 2 INCHES if you were to compare "group" sizes and not scores--best I recall anyway)

Also, the statement (above) about "The m1garand is the most accurate semi auto platform made maybe not the lighest but deffinatly the most accurate,and with glass there awesome" is patently untrue. While I have at least a half-dozen M1's (including both a Fowler .06 and Leisinger .308 match rifles--and have owned MANY more over the years), there was (and is) a GOOD reason that military match and then civilian match shooters switched over to M14/M1A in the 60's and then AGAIN to ARs in the late 80's/early 90s. Each time, the scores in matches dropped significantly. The M1 is "heavy" because it is (comparatively) COMPLICATED. It doesn't bend, twist, and stretch like an AK!, but it isn't nearly as rigid when fired as an M14 (or AR).

The M1 is a great rifle and can be made to shoot very well, but the M14/M1A out of the box OR tweaked will easily have the advantage over an M1 (and not just because of the .308 being a bit more accurate than the .06 round as a rule). Out of the box, I would expect a decent "stock" M1A to shoot match ammo pretty close to 1.5, maybe a bit less. Even a very nicely set up and assembled stock M1 (new/mint barrel, etc.) isn't likely to do nearly this well (more like 1.75 to 2.0). Likewise, the AR15 dominates the match firing line because it is not only easier to shoot it is more accurate than the M1A/308 rifles.

This is a 10 shot 100 yard group (using my "practice" match ammo) and I could (easily) repeat this (or BETTER with true match loads) pretty much forever with an AR (no scope of course).

Maybe you should buy a dictionary and look up platform ( Everbody on this site probably knows that m1a/m14 and m1Garand is the same platform just improved design according to the ordanance department ) as for as you doing better with an ar15/m16 patern gun that is no surprise to me seeing as how to were invented because of number of G.i.s having trouble overcoming the recoil that comes with these rifles most any untrained kid can pic one up and use them. does that make them better? well this isn't AR15.com maybe your online friends on (call of duty) buys that B.S. but nobody heres buyin it

Thanks from nf1e@snet.net
meterman is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > Rifle Forum > M1 Garand Accuracy



Search tags for this page
4ftx4ft archery targets
,
burris 536
,

how accurate should an m1 garand be with 2.5 scope at 100 yards

,
joko@snet.net
,
leisinger garand modification
,
m1 garand bullet group at 100 yards
,
m1 garand cantlever scope mount
,
m1 garand s&k - insta-mount scope mounts iron site
,
m1 scoped accuracy
,
sand sock
,
sk mounts for m1 garand
,
you tube s&k scope mount for garand
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Moderator Tools
Display Modes


Similar M14 Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
***Carlos Hathcock USMC Sniper Scope louie Optics 6 August 22nd, 2012 07:33 AM
mounted a leatherwood scout scope... cynergyou Modern M14 1 August 6th, 2012 06:12 PM
Why do I need an expensive scope??? DefendTheConstitution Optics 37 December 3rd, 2010 03:48 PM
First time mounting a scope with the ARMS #18 mount/#22 rings WarEagle Optics 8 July 23rd, 2009 05:02 PM
Super Sniper (?) scope help! coyotewillie The M14 14 October 5th, 2005 08:06 PM



Top Gun Sites Top Sites List