Cowboy

Anybody using this combo? I ran a search and have found several references to Varget with 168's, but no 175 loads.

Pappy

I've been playing around with Varget and 168's. It would be interesting to see responses with the 175's

HighPowerShooter

I use the 175's for the 600yd stage.. 42.5gr Varget, CCI200primer, LC69 case. Out of my Kreiger barreled M1A that load averages 2575fps

musketjon

Cowboy,
Use the loads listed for the 168's and you'll be ok. I read once where if your bullet weight isn't shown exactly, use the closest LIGHTER bullet load shown for safe loads.
Jon

Cowboy

Thanks everybody.

HighPowerShooter, can I get a confirmation that that's the correct charge weight? It just seems a tad low (more like .308 than .30-06). I just want to make sure.

HighPowerShooter

DOH!! I did say it was for my M1A.... well... for my 30-06 I was using 47.0gr Varget, CCI200 primer, LC52 case

Cowboy

Thanks

Sunray

There's Varget data for a 175 grain HPBT bullet on Hodgdon's site. 45.0 to 48.0. Who made the bullet doesn't matter.

Cowboy

Does 2650 fps sound about right for M72 velocity? I used to have a link that had all that kind of info, but its gone.

Cowboy

Scratch that, I mean 2,550.

JAS

We chronographed a box of M72 Match and the average was 2620 fps. This velocity will keep the 175 SMK super sonic to 1000 yards. A velocity of 2600 to 2620 should also work well for presighting using either Sierra 175 Match Kings or Nosler 175 Custom Competition bullets and the M72 thermometer target.

gas_gunner

Where can you get those thermometer targets?

Danny

JAS

Champion's Choice, Champion Shooter's Supply. or you can stop by and I'll give you one!

gas_gunner

Oh,
I have ONE, partially shot, which I received from my LR Team Mate, just for the dimensions. Speaking of "Stop by", I need to go to the North Store. I haven't been there since before the remodel. Had thought about getting one of the CMP Kimber Rifles, or maybe an M1, but not sure on that. I'm a lefty shooter and the Kimber (I found) is a LOT nicer for smallbore position than my H&R Model 12, but it's still a righty rifle and $600.00.

Danny

Retmsgt.

Read an interesting website about this, guy states the 168 does better than the 175 at 1000 yards because the 175 cannot overcome it's initial velocity being lower;
Here's the link, let me know what you guys think.

http://garandshooter.com/Documents/Is%2 ... 0Rifle.doc

JAS

We saw guys at Camp Perry trying to use 168's at 1000 yards. They were going subsonic before reaching the target. A guy next to us used his entire time shooting sighters and never did shoot for score. The reports from the pits was that his bullets were coming in subsonic and the few that did strike the target were keyholing.

Retmsgt.

Thanks JAS, I kinda thought that. that's why I asked what you guys thought. Personally, I never had any trouble with the 175 SMKs. I ran them at,IIRC, 2600fps. Wierd thing was, the further out, the better they held group. Evidently they need distance to settle down and stabilize.

hkp7fan

I spent yesterday at the range with a chronograph testing handloads for my M1 Garand. I finally have a handload that duplicates military M72 Match ammunition:

Caliber: .30-06
Case: FA-61 Match
Bullet: Sierra 175 gr. HPBT #2275
Powder: 48.5 gr. Hodgdon Varget
Primer: Winchester Large Rifle
Cartridge Overall Length: 3.330"

This load chronographed at 2697 fps average velocity with an SD of 14.03. Since the target velocity was 2700 fps, I'd call it "spot on". It also happened to produce the smallest group and the highest score of the eight loads I tested (including some 1968-vintage M72).

I've been meaning to develop this load for a long time, as I am almost out of surplus M72. I would have loved to have simply found the load someplace, but I searched high and low and nobody had one listed for this bullet. Everybody seems to want to use 4895 or 4064 for their M1 Garand loads. But I love Varget, so this was a worthwhile exercise. Now people can find my load and use it if they choose.

Fair warning: There is a lot of conflicting data out there. Depending on which loading manual you read, this load may exceed the maximum recommended. But I found enough information to make me comfortable with it. Plus I'm using a McCann adjustable gas cylinder lock screw, so any extra gas just vents.

It was a beautiful day, and an awesome way to spend the last day of 2013.

Happy New Year!

hkp7fan

Regarding velocity measurements:

I recently had a conversation with an engineer/ballistician who was involved in designing the new Navy sniper ammunition, which uses the 175 gr. Sierra HPBT bullet. (As an aside, the new MK 316 Mod O (7.62 Special Ball, Long Range) velocity is 2580 fps at 78 feet from the muzzle (22" bbl, same as an M1A), and they've achieved .75 MOA accuracy with it).

He told me something that I never knew before.

For obscure historical reasons involving the type of chronograph equipment used decades and decades ago, muzzle velocities used in military ammunition specifications are measured at 78 ft. from the muzzle. SAAMI specs, on the other hand, use velocities as measured 15 ft. from muzzle. I talked to a Sierra technician, and he confirmed that their ballistics software is based on measurements taken 15 ft. from the muzzle.

So you have to do the math for the particular bullet (taking into account the weight and ballistic coefficient) to translate between the two.

This solved the mystery for me about why the velocity printed on the box for M72 Match ammunition is 2640 fps. That is measured 78 ft. from the muzzle, so it would be higher if measured at 15 ft. using the SAAMI protocol.

He gave me a rough rule of thumb they use to predict velocity loss. I can't find my notes from that conversation right now so I don't want to try to repeat it, but I did the math at the time and came up with something close to 2700 fps as the muzzle velocity I would try for on the range with my chronograph at 15 ft. This turned out to be the most accurate load at 100 yards, the range I was shooting at over the chronograph. I can't speak to how it will perform at longer distances, as I haven't tried it yet. But I feel confident that this is close to the M72 Match round. In any case, it will work for me.

I did clock my 1968 vintage M72 Match ammo at 2620 fps yesterday. Since it was designed to be going 2640 fps at 78 ft. from the muzzle, it is clear that it has lost some power over the 40 years since it was manufactured. So unless you are just trying to duplicate the exact performance of the old ammunition you have been using, I think it's more desirable to work from the military specification. See TM 43-0001-27 - Army Ammunition Data Sheets, c15, 29 Mar 2013 for complete specifications.

FWIW, the Sierra ballistics software says that you could have a muzzle velocity as low as 2350 fps and still be supersonic at 1000 yards. I had the additional objective of finding a load in which I could substitute the Sierra #2160 180 gr. GameKing to use for hunting, and wanted to find the maximum safe velocity to ensure good terminal bullet performance.

In the end I think it boils down to what's most accurate in your own rifle for your own purposes.

Happy shooting!

Charlie Petty

There has been some debate over where to measure the 15'. I think the industry standard is for a 10' screen spacing (that was what the early Oehler units used). Some said the start screen should then be 10' from the muzzle.

Today with the scene spacings normally 1-2 feet. that probably doesn't matter,