.30-06 Guard/Gallery Cartridge

[RC932]

So I see this M1917 Enfield in the pawn shop for 200 bucks, Bubba cut off the front sight wings and cut down the military stock. I've been eyeballing it for a restoration project. I've also been eyeballing a Springfield 03 made in 1903...but enough about the rifles I want to get and possibly shoot.

Those two rifles got me thinking, what's a good low powered load for .30-06? I find out the military made these old Guard and Gallery loads. The M1906 Guard cartridge used 16.1 grains of "bullseye" powder for a velocity of 1200 FPS.

I've looked into reloading ever since I was looking at a Krag rifle and a Springfield 1873, considering how expensive .30-40 and .45-70 is. This .30-06 round got me thinking too. Anyone know where any useful load data for it would be or if they have any on hand?

[Junk Yard Dog]

Why would you not want to shoot regular US M2 ball rounds in a 1917 or 1903? How low is the serial number on that '03. if this is an original condition rifle actually made in 1903 would be very rare and expensive. Of course if it's not a round rod bayonet model chambered for US .30-03 then it has been updated at least once. There were issues with the early M1903 receivers un until 1917-18 when a few of them failed in the trenches. While there were some issues with how the arsenals handled the heat treating, the number of failed receivers was very small, and Uncle continued to use them until the end of WW2. We need more information on that '03, the 1917 sounds like a typical Bubba, make sure it has the original 1917-18 dated barrel, if not then check the receiver ring for cracks.

[RC932]

The serial number of the rifle I'm looking at purchasing is 6135. Second lowest I've seen, I remember seeing one that was in the low 1000s. It received the 1906 modification. If I do decide to shoot this 03 (and I'm highly debating it) I was looking at something that wouldn't put as much strain on it as service loads.

As for the 1917, thankfully it retains the original barrel, but Bubba removed the front sight wings. even the cut down stock is USGI. Being just 250 bucks with what I remember to have a decent looking barrel, I'm debating on restoring it to the original configuration. I'm certainly not a fan of its current look

[Junk Yard Dog]

The lowest I have is 1905, it is a WW2 rebuild with a 1942 Springfield barrel. It was heavily used during the war and the bore is near at an end so it isn't fired much. It has been fired with regular M2 ball.

[target]

Mine was made in 1907 and was rebuilt with SA parts in Sept. of 1944. I probably wouldn't shoot an original low number gun that hasn't been rebuilt and proofed, but I shoot mine since it's been through WW1, WW2 and a government rebuild. Hatcher's Notebook has some good information about the low number guns. Apparently the biggest problem they were having with the low number guns was the poor quality ammo during the first World War. The case walls had varying levels of thickness and the brass was pretty poor quality. Failures caused by this brass in most cases would damage even properly heat treated rifles were magnified by the brittle-ness of the low number receivers.

The Marines used rifles that in some cases had not seen a government refurb since it was issued in the first World War in some of the nastiest fighting of the Second. From what I have read the Marines reported no failures of low number rifles, and those rifles were used from the start of the Pacific theater to the dropping of the A-bombs.

There is just so much information about these guns out there that it would take more than one post to digest it all. Most guys just repeat what someone else says when it comes to things like this instead of doin a bit of digging and research for themselves.

[Greasemonkey]

I restored a bubba Winchester M1917 a few years ago. It was fun, yet very frustrating, but I learned alot about the old war horse. My second Winchester, I bought complete, saved me alot of headaches.
The restore job parts cost more than the actual rifle it's self, but in the end, it was worth it. An unaltered stock was about the hardest thing to find, a rare expensive beast, and trying to match handguard colors as closely as possible.

Before and after shots, and the pair together.

[Junk Yard Dog]

[RC932]

I went and looked at some photos of the Springfield again. The barrel is marked B A 04-06 and the stock has a dual cartouche behind the trigger guard. One's a large P and I can't tell the other one from the picture quality. If a 1906 barrel holds up just fine I'll use some of that Greek 06. I just need to save up the cash for it. It's a beautiful keeper.

Another reason I'd like a lower powered gallery load, there are some places I'd like to go shoot that's a shorter range and a full powered 06 would be a little overkill. I'd also like to do some short range plinking with it.

And that 1917 Enfield...that's beautiful. I really want to restore that one at the pawn shop now

[Outpost75]

(This article originally appeared in the Cast Bullet Association’s Fouling Shot magazine and is cross-posted here by permission of the author).

Re-visiting .30-’06 “Guard” and “Gallery Practice” Loads with Bullseye Powder

C.E. "Ed" Harris,

A few years ago friends gave me several thousand pulled Cal. 30 Ball M2 (152-gr.FMJ) bullets and fired empty cases they accumulated from CMP .30-’06 ammo from which they had yanked the GI bullets and replaced them with Sierra 155-gr. Palmas over the original powder charge. I was offered half the fired brass and all the pulled bullets to use my Dillon Auto-Swage 600 to rework the brass and work up a gallery load suitable for Junior training and rapid-fire practice at 100 yards in 03A3 Springfields being used as Appleseed trainers. Our intent was to approximate the M1906 Guard cartridge. An article in Rifle Magazine, March-April 1990, by Jeffrey W. Houck, p49 was our stimulus for this.

Reduced power gallery and guard cartridges were developed for use in the M1903 Springfield on urban installations where full power ammunition posed a risk of collateral damage if fired in anger. The M1906 Guard cartridge used a reduced charge of Bullseye powder with the M1906 150-gr. FMJ service bullet and was identified by 6 flutes on the shoulder of the cartridge case. It gave accuracy equal to normal Ball ammunition at ranges up to 200 yards and shot approximately to point of aim at 100 yards using the standing bar of the folded down battle sight on the M1903 Springfield rifle. At a range of 200 yards the Guard cartridge required an elevation of 650 yards on the rear sight elevation slide.

Initial experiments sought a subsonic load for minimum noise, but 100-yard groups with the pulled M2 Ball bullets when loaded subsonic weren’t not as good as when they were driven a bit faster. Nor did I find any benefit to using pistol primers, case fillers or enlarged flash holes with Bullseye powder in these .30-’06 gallery loads. Once-fired LC69 military cases were full length resized; primer pockets swaged, trimmed to length and primed with standard Winchester Large Rifle primers.

We settled on a charge of 8 grains of Alliant Bullseye as the best compromise with pulled Ball M2 150-grain jacketed bullets. Bullets were seated to their cannelure and crimped using the Lee Factory Crimp die. Velocity from my 22" Mauser sporter is 1080 f.p.s. and from a Sako A2 silhouette rifle with 24” Douglas Premium barrel with tight-necked target chamber and SAAMI throat 1160 f.p.s. Report and recoil are mild, like shooting a .32-20.

The average of five consecutive 5-shot groups fired at 50 yards from the Mauser sporter with 4X hunting scope was 1.2 inches. The heavy barrel Sako with 10X scope shot an inch at 50 yards. Point of impact at 50 yards was 3.5" below Ball M2, so the duplex reticule as used a short-range post, without changing the normal hunting zero with 180-gr. ammunition.

Firing at 100 yards, the Mauser sporter struck much lower, and required re-zeroing, but accuracy was OK averaging 2.6” for ten consecutive 5-shot groups at 100 yards, which compares to Ball M2 ammunition. The Sako with 10X scope averaged 2” for ten consecutive 5-shot groups, also typical of M2 Ball fired in that rifle.

We also tested cast bullets, without GC, to compare against the Ball M2 pulls. Our cast bullets were cast in bulk from wheelweights using gang molds, culled by visual inspection only, tumbled in Lee Liquid Alox, and loaded as-cast without sizing. Cast bullet groups were as good or better than the M2 Ball pulls. Velocities were higher with lubricated cast bullets than with jacketed bullets fired with the same powder charge, due to reduced bore drag and approached 1400 f.p.s. with 8 grains of Bullseye. We found it advantageous to reduce the charge with plainbased cast to reduce leading which impairs accuracy over long strings of fire. RCBS Little Dandy powder measures #13 and #14 throw charges from 7.2-7.8 grains which shoot well. These are great for low cost practice, training, and small game, and useable in any sound .30-’06 rifle.

If low noise and reduced danger space are the goal, load no more than 8 grs. of Bullseye in the .30-'06 or 7.62x54R Russian, or 7 grains of Bullseye in the 7.62 NAT0, 8mm Mauser, 7.65 Argentine, 7.7 Japanese or .303 British with any jacketed bullet or cast bullet of the same weight or lighter than the military service bullet appropriate for the caliber. Do not reduce the charge any further with jacketed bullets because you may "stick" a bullet in the bore.

When using lubricated lead cast bullets of a weight similar to or less than the service bullet, it is OK to reduce the charge for lower noise, if desired. In typical military bolt rifles you can use as little as 4 grains of Bullseye, Clays, 700-X, Red Dot, Unique, W231 or TiteGroup. Lubricated lead bullets exit the barrel reliably down to about 700 f.p.s. and accuracy is reasonable to 50 yards. Do not reduce charges further.

The web site http://www.gmdr.com/lever/lowveldata.htm has comprehensive reduced rifle load data and is recommended as further reference.

These cast loads approximate the M1919 Gallery Practice cartridge and do not cycle the action in semi-automatic rifles, but can be fed from clips in the Garand if the action is worked manually. These charges can be safely used in the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge with similar results. To produce similar loads for the 7.62 NATO, 8mm Mauser, 7.65 Argentine, 7.7 Japanese or .303 British, maximum charges should be reduced by a full grain. Whenever using reduced charges of dense, fast-burning pistol powder it is absolutely necessary to visually inspect 100% every case for correct powder fill using a pen light to positively prevent missing or double charges or spilled powder.

Refer to .30-06 GALLERY LOADS, Rifle Magazine March-April 1990, by Jeffrey W. Houck, P49

[FineRedMist]

Thumbs up! Good information.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk