M14 Forum banner

81 - 100 of 111 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
Sorry, no, it's not and just because you repeat yourself, it doesn't make it true. Interchangeable, in a pinch, yes, but not exactly the same.

Belted ammunition is tailored to reduce bore erosion, so it uses a different propellant.

And besides, the specifications for .30-06 never specified muzzle or port pressure, so manufacturers are free to use slower less erosive propellants (and bump up muzzle pressure) for belted. And since ammunition packaged in belts almost never was broken down into M1 clips (as clips were never procurable as a separate item), the risk was minimal.
lol..except the same ammo BEFORE it was belted at the factory was belted at the UNIT level from 20 round cartons.

M2 ball is still M2 ball... there is no such thing as M2 ball "machinegun" ammo. It's M2 ball or it isn't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,778 Posts
And dry is much worse than when greased....hence my point. A dry oprod cam and bolt lug will increase the friction and stress on the rod.
If you bother to do the calculations the decrease, the force required to move the operating rod dry versus lubricated for a constant cylinder pressure is about 50 pounds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,778 Posts
lol..except the same ammo BEFORE it was belted at the factory was belted at the UNIT level from 20 round cartons.

M2 ball is still M2 ball... there is no such thing as M2 ball "machinegun" ammo. It's M2 ball or it isn't.
Only for cloth belts. Disintegrating links were the predominant method of issue from 1942 onward, loose disintegrating links were/are not procurable through supply. Ammunition package in disintegrating links was linked and packaged at the factory, in both boxes and "spam cans". Ammunition supplied in belts is not exactly the same as ammunition supplied for rifle use.

This experience in late WW2 and Korea is why the Army stopped making such a big deal about interchangeable MG and rifle ammunition. It hadn't been exactly the same in the first place for a long time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
Only for cloth belts. Disintegrating links were the predominant method of issue from 1942 onward, loose disintegrating links were/are not procurable through supply. Ammunition supplied in belts is not exactly the same as ammunition supplied for rifle use.

This experience in late WW2 and Korea is why the Army stopped making such a big deal about interchangeable MG and rifle ammunition. It hadn't been exactly the same in the first place for a long time.
Yet cloth belts were still in use for decades.

And M2 ball is still M2 ball... nothing more nothing less.


You remind me of the guy who said you couldn't delink m249 saw ammo and shoot in m16s because it's "machine gun ammo".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Yet cloth belts were still in use for decades.

And M2 ball is still M2 ball... nothing more nothing less.


You remind me of the guy who said you couldn't delink m249 saw ammo and shoot in m16s because it's "machine gun ammo".
i thought I read in one of those army technical manuals that ammo was lot tested
The best lots went to rifle testing facilities, next best to GI next best , training and lastly the stuff that was darn near failing went to be linkec? Trying to remeber the manual something like US Small Arms Ammuntion Specifications and testing standards. ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Found this post, might help or confuse.
I do not have a M1.

Found this post, might help or confuse.
I do not have a M1.

If you can't run any bullet in a M1, why do the military shoot 173 gr. bullets?
So, back to original question, all ALL, factory 06 loads good to go in a M1? That was question

RP makes 220gr coreloct. Good to go? Hot rod "fusion loads" ?

Who knows what powder goes in which load?
lol..except the same ammo BEFORE it was belted at the factory was belted at the UNIT level from 20 round cartons.

M2 ball is still M2 ball... there is no such thing as M2 ball "machinegun" ammo. It's M2 ball or it isn't.
It's belted for headspace...nothing more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
What I am trying to say is that the M1 is a very robust design and , when in good condition and properly maintained, is quite capable of handling heavier bullets up to the 180 gr. Of coarse, loads should be established that are within a reasonable margin of safety. Bullet mfgs have published load specifications for semi autos that can include the M1. Many of the horror stories that are perpetuated via the internet are the result of stupid actions by shooters that should have known better. Please, use multiple sources of data and try not to rely on hearsay and unverified rumor control as you make your personal decisions.
When I shoot off the bench with my M1 I remove the gas plug and operate it like a bolt gun. I see no different in group size at 100 yds.. and I hate to dig for my brass in the snow or among the range junk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,513 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
lol..except the same ammo BEFORE it was belted at the factory was belted at the UNIT level from 20 round cartons.

M2 ball is still M2 ball... there is no such thing as M2 ball "machinegun" ammo. It's M2 ball or it isn't.
You must be talking about "belt fed" ammo, not belted ammo..as in belted case 7mm Mag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,778 Posts
Yet cloth belts were still in use for decades.

And M2 ball is still M2 ball... nothing more nothing less.

You remind me of the guy who said you couldn't delink m249 saw ammo and shoot in m16s because it's "machine gun ammo".
As stated ealier, repeating yourself does not make something true.

There is a difference between "different" and "tailored for" . . .

First off, the M1 is easy to have ammunition tailored to it, as the method of packaging precludes cross loading. M1s require ammunition be in clips. Ammunition in clips can be broken out into loose ammunition, but loose ammunition cannot easily be loaded in clips in a combat theater, and not worth the effort in a training environment, because clips are not procurable through supply. The only way to get clips is to police the battlefield, something no one has the time or inclination to do.

Did you ever think there might have been a reason they never made M1 clips procurable as a separate item?

Second, here is a concrete example of "tailoring" to a specific application:

437964


IMR 4895 is defined by Drawing No. 10534789, the heading of which, is shown above. However, you will note that on the left there are eight (8) different dash numbers, each for a single ammunition type. IMR 4895, 10534789-7 is tailored to perform best in Caliber .30, API, M14, -1, -2 works best in M118 Match, and -8 M72 Match.

How is this done if there is only one drawing? Each constituent ingredient is listed as a percentage, with a tolerance band (some rather large like 0.10 to 1.00%). By pushing the tolerances in one direction or another, the burning properties change slightly, and these difference make a difference in how well the propellant works with certain bullets.

By selecting specific lots of propellants and types of propellant (because M2 Ball had several types authorized), you can easily tailor ammunition to work best in specific types of weapons, and then package it so that the user will most likely use it in that weapon.

Does that mean it won't work it other type of weapons? No, of course it will work, however, the weapon ammunition work best with the combination tailored to that application.

And one last thing, yes cloth belts were used through the Korean War. But, aircraft just cannot used them period, tanks do not use them, as they cannot be linked together to form a longer belt, and most other vehicle mounts don't like them for the same reason. But we aren't talking about machine guns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
As stated ealier, repeating yourself does not make something true.

There is a difference between "different" and "tailored for" . . .

First off, the M1 is easy to have ammunition tailored to it, as the method of packaging precludes cross loading. M1s require ammunition be in clips. Ammunition in clips can be broken out into loose ammunition, but loose ammunition cannot easily be loaded in clips in a combat theater, and not worth the effort in a training environment, because clips are not procurable through supply. The only way to get clips is to police the battlefield, something no one has the time or inclination to do.

Did you ever think there might have been a reason they never made M1 clips procurable as a separate item?

Second, here is a concrete example of "tailoring" to a specific application:

View attachment 437964

IMR 4895 is defined by Drawing No. 10534789, the heading of which, is shown above. However, you will note that on the left there are eight (8) different dash numbers, each for a single ammunition type. IMR 4895, 10534789-7 is tailored to perform best in Caliber .30, API, M14, -1, -2 works best in M118 Match, and -8 M72 Match.

How is this done if there is only one drawing? Each constituent ingredient is listed as a percentage, with a tolerance band (some rather large like 0.10 to 1.00%). By pushing the tolerances in one direction or another, the burning properties change slightly, and these difference make a difference in how well the propellant works with certain bullets.

By selecting specific lots of propellants and types of propellant (because M2 Ball had several types authorized), you can easily tailor ammunition to work best in specific types of weapons, and then package it so that the user will most likely use it in that weapon.

Does that mean it won't work it other type of weapons? No, of course it will work, however, the weapon ammunition work best with the combination tailored to that application.

And one last thing, yes cloth belts were used through the Korean War. But, aircraft just cannot used them period, tanks do not use them, as they cannot be linked together to form a longer belt, and most other vehicle mounts don't like them for the same reason. But we aren't talking about machine guns.
So back again with the same litany.

Give us some proof that M2 ball is optimized for the weapon it's "packaged" for and that garand clipped M2 ball is different than boxed or belted M2 ball.


Because your drawing above doesn't support that claim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,778 Posts
So back again with the same litany.

Give us some proof that M2 ball is optimized for the weapon it's "packaged" for and that garand clipped M2 ball is different than boxed or belted M2 ball.


Because your drawing above doesn't support that claim.
So, you are stating that they will selectively tailor a propellant to specific bullets, but will not do the same for ammunition and weapons?

If you can select a propellant type that is less erosive, but has a slightly higher muzzle pressure and isn't quite as accurate, you would not load that in belts? Or, if you have a lot of ammunition that has a higher than desired muzzle pressure, you would load that in clips for M1s?

I have provided the evidence and the reasoning behind it, but feel free to believe what you want.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
649 Posts
Gentlemen,
The following is from TM 43-0001-27 titled "Army Ammunition Data Sheets Small Caliber Ammunition" as of April1994 regarding M2 ball

"Use: Machine Guns, Caliber .30, M37, M1919A4 and M1919A6; and Rifle, Caliber .30, M1. The cartridge is intended for use against personnel or unarmored targets".
The only cartridge listed for a specific weapon is M72 Match.


John
 
81 - 100 of 111 Posts
Top