168gr Federal Gold Metal Match

I run 42.3 grainsof IMR 4895 behind a Hornady 168 with Nosler brass and a CCI BR2 primer. Ironically I shot some of these yesterday through my Savage 11 Trophy. 18 rounds averaged 2.74 inches at 300 yards. That is not bad for the old spotted barreled Savage. I usually use IMR 4064 and was pleasantly surprised.
 
Gregory Gauvin said:
On the box Federal says they use 168 grain Sierra Matchking BTHP bullets. I do not see a cannelure. My gunsmith says trying to mimic this load will be difficult, as others have tried, reason being, is that Federal use a proprietary blend of powder that no one really knows what it is, nor can get. The only information I can gather is muzzle velocity is stated at 2600 ft/sec. OAL measures 2.80".

This information you got is not quite right. I've pulled sample boxes from lots of GM308M that were 20 years apart and found 43.5±0.2 grains of IMR4064 in both. The rated velocity is 2650 fps, but that is from a 24" SAAMI test barrel. 2600 fps is about what a 22" M14 barrel would produce if the chamber were dead minimum size and its bore dimensions matched the SAAMI standard. Federal does use a special grade of IMR4064 with calcium carbonate added to reduce muzzle flash in their military sniper rifle loads under the 175 grain SMK (MK316 m.0), but I don't know that they use the flash suppressant version in the GM Match load. I'm sure they did not before the MK316 was developed. They may now just to avoid buying and tracking two different runs of powder.

Typically, even when a commercial ammunition maker uses one of the powder numbers that is also available to handloaders, they buy it in bulk grade, which has wider burn rate tolerances than the canister grade handloaders use, but which they compensate for with pressure gun testing. The GM308M and M2 seem to be an exception to that, given the charge weights are so identical over such a long time span. I suppose it may even be possible they get a special more tightly controlled burn rate grade.

The primer they use is their own Federal 205M, which must be used to copy the load exactly, as must their COL.

The hitch is the brass. The military marksmanship units found new brass to be more accurate than reloaded brass in service rifle match weapons. This is likely due to the geometry being more symmetrical. The M14 is famous for bending rims and fireforming cases heads out of square with the long axis of the case. Additionally, it takes some extra effort to avoid pulling case necks off-axis as a conventional expander typically does. This is probably a good deal of what frustrates people's efforts to duplicated the GM308M and GM308M2 (175 grain SMK) ammunition exactly. Some folks find re-annealing the brass every load cycle helps uniform bullet pull.

I've been lucky in that my M1A does not tend to produce out-of-square case heads, so I don't have that particular issue. If yours doesn't either, then you are down to the same issues that reloading for a bolt gun have. You can search this forum on methods of keeping case necks true to the overall longitudinal axis of the case. You want to be sure to do a proper job of primer seating. Federal recommends the anvil be compressed 0.003" into the cup during seating of their large rifle primers. That is also called setting the bridge or reconsolidating the primer. I recommend you clean the insides of case necks. Using the stainless pin cleaning method or the ultrasonic method will typically clean them perfectly. If you don't do either, try spinning a bore brush in a drill and running them over it. This is all to help keep bullet pull consistent. I recommend using the Redding Competition Seater die, as it's the only one I've seen that can redirect a bullet tip to align with lower runout than the neck itself has. The M14 will knock them off a little on loading, but it will always be in the same direction and orientation in the chamber, which groups just as well as straight does.

Because of the varying of neck tension and the possible lot differences in your powder, I would buy a box of GM308M to fire over your chronograph on the same day and under the same conditions you use to test your hand loads. Bring more than one powder charge adjust the load of the 4064 to get the same average velocity reading out of your gun that you get from the purchased ammunition. That should put you in very close stead with the original. You can buy Lapua brass, which has very nearly identical capacity to Federal cases, is very well made, but expensive. Most military cases will have a little less capacity in this chambering than Federal does, but if it is Lake City, the difference can be close enough that the charge weight difference to get the same velocity from your gun is less than half a grain. Again, work up to a matching velocity from your gun.

Good luck with it.
 
Last edited:
The hitch is the brass. The military marksmanship units found new brass to be more accurate than reloaded brass in service rifle match weapons.

I don't know this to be true, what I do know, given the amount of rounds these guys fire, they don't have enough Ammunition Technicians to resize, prime, all their fired ammunition. Based on my discussions and observations, the Marine Team and AMU shoot factory ammunition out to 300 yards. Their 600 yard stuff, new primed cases with their own secret sauce. The fired cases are not reused.

Within this month I was shooting 2700 with AMU shooters. Great guys, and I asked them how many 45 ACP rounds they were shooting. I suggested, about 5000 a year?, and I was told about 5000 rounds per month, per individual!!! :eek: They don't have the people to crank out that much ammunition, factory new ammunition is cheaper than the cost of adding Soldiers to make ammunition, so it makes sense, they are shooting factory new ammunition for economic reasons.

This is likely due to the geometry being more symmetrical. The M14 is famous for ..... fireforming cases heads out of square with the long axis of the case.

I know the source for this, and I am beginning to doubt the veracity of the guy. I recently caught him making up data to win an argument. No matter what his skills may be, or his experience, or that he almost set a National Record, I now believe, that if he gives a number, or an opinion that I cannot independently verify, then, it might be true, or it might not be true.


I've been lucky in that my M1A does not tend to produce out-of-square case heads, so I don't have that particular issue.


I have checked the brass out of my match Garands, several rack grade Garands, and my match M1a's, and I don't get out of square case heads. Therefore, I don't believe the claim that military M14's necessarily produced out of square case heads. I think this is another one of those unverifiable claims by a person who will make up data to win an argument.
 
Unclenick said:
This information you got is not quite right. I've pulled sample boxes from lots of GM308M that were 20 years apart and found 43.5±0.2 grains of IMR4064 in both. The rated velocity is 2650 fps, but that is from a 24" SAAMI test barrel.

I pulled a couple rounds of Fed 168gr GMM in 2014 . I also got 43.3gr to 43.5gr of powder . It very much looked like IMR 4064 .

IMR 4064 on the right . Pulled powder on the left . The pulled powder looks a little lighter in color . It how ever had been pulled for a few months before the picture was taken and had been in and out of the container it was kept in many times . Not sure if that matters or if it is straight up a lighter gray in color then the IMR 4064
9BkbIZ.jpg


Slam fire :

What is your technique for checking for out of square case heads ?? The only one I've tried is the line them up metod and see if any are leaning .

zywRaP.jpg
 
The hitch is the brass. The military marksmanship units found new brass to be more accurate than reloaded brass in service rifle match weapons.

I don't know this to be true, what I do know, given the amount of rounds these guys fire, they don't have enough Ammunition Technicians to resize, prime, all their fired ammunition.

I believe I got that from Bart Bobbit. I think he said that when he was on the Navy MU they were experimenting with reloading but didn't find it paid.

Within this month I was shooting 2700 with AMU shooters. Great guys, and I asked them how many 45 ACP rounds they were shooting. I suggested, about 5000 a year?, and I was told about 5000 rounds per month, per individual!!!

…and I think I read somewhere that the top IPSC shooters will put about 2000 rounds a week downrange in practice during their match season. I presume that by "top" it was meant to refer to those with sponsors who have their ammo provided. I don't know. A couple of times I've done 3,000 rounds over about four days while visiting a friend who owns a Dillon 1050. We've been able to load up to 1800 rounds in 45 minutes on that machine with two of us feeding it. (That does not count filling primer tubes, which was an after-dinner activity on those visits.)

I have checked the brass out of my match Garands, several rack grade Garands, and my match M1a's, and I don't get out of square case heads. Therefore, I don't believe the claim that military M14's necessarily produced out of square case heads. I think this is another one of those unverifiable claims by a person who will make up data to win an argument.

Well that is, indeed, interesting to hear. I've never heard it said about Garands; just about the shorter M14 action, but I never saw a reason one should be worse than the other. I do, however, know two other sources to check with who have dealt with large numbers of M14's and done a lot of reloading. I'll see what I can learn.

If it turns out the out-of-square head is not the explanation, it seems more likely to be the more mundane issue of expanders pulling necks off-axis that would account for Bart's (if I'm remembering correctly that he was the source) report. This is another thing I can check on.


MG,

I'm going to drop Federal a note, but I suspect the difference in color is the presence of the flash suppressant. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they buy the same powder for both commercial match and military loading just to avoid having to segregate lots.

If you have a Wilson case trimmer, you can use it to check for head squareness. Just put a case in the holder and turn it backward. The trimmer cutter is half an inch wide and if you just lightly kiss the head with it while turning it, you will see whether it touches the brass surface evenly or not.
 
My go to bullet in my R700 1-12" Varmint is the 168 smk. However the FGMM 168 does not shoot that well in my rifle. I crono'd the FGMM at about 2640 fps. And through a lot of testing handloads I realized my 26" R700 likes a slightly milder load. When I load for about 2530 fps I observe some incredible accuracy to the tune of in some tests sessions equalling .22 moa at 200 meters. So again handloads and testing is the only way to truly tap a barrel's individual accuracy potential.
 
I have checked the brass out of my match Garands, several rack grade Garands, and my match M1a's, and I don't get out of square case heads. Therefore, I don't believe the claim that military M14's necessarily produced out of square case heads. I think this is another one of those unverifiable claims by a person who will make up data to win an argument
.

Well that is, indeed, interesting to hear. I've never heard it said about Garands; just about the shorter M14 action, but I never saw a reason one should be worse than the other. I do, however, know two other sources to check with who have dealt with large numbers of M14's and done a lot of reloading. I'll see what I can learn.

If it turns out the out-of-square head is not the explanation, it seems more likely to be the more mundane issue of expanders pulling necks off-axis that would account for Bart's (if I'm remembering correctly that he was the source) report. This is another thing I can check on.

Your memory is excellent, as usual. The source is Mr Bart Bobbitt. He puts out a lot of information that is unsourced and no one challenges him because of his shooting reputation. This one is easy to check, go measure the case run out of your Garands or M1a's.

Now, case heads could be out of square if there was some dimensional issues with bolt alignment. As you know, or will remember, the top back of the bolt touches the bottom top inside of the receiver. I believe if that dimension was off, then there could be misalignment, and out of square condition, with the actions. I don't see why it would be peculiar to military M14 actions only. But, Springfield Armory, H&R and International Harvester did such a good job, I am not seeing it in military Garand actions. Nor am I seeing it in aftermarket SA M1a's.

Something I do believe, observations in the real world always supersede authority. Just because some big blowhead says it is so, if it does not function that way in the real world, it is not so.
 
As far as accuracy goes and out of square bolt faces . How much can/does that effect accuracy ? I ask because at first glance it would seem obvious that it would . How ever the more I think about it I think maybe not so much .

If the firing pin pushes the case forward the case expands and sticks/seals to the chamber wall then case head stretches back to bolt face . Assuming that happens in that order then the case is securely centered in the chamber before the head is pushed back against the out of square bolt face . If that is the order of events , why would an out of square bolt face effect accuracy ?
 
As far as accuracy goes and out of square bolt faces . How much can/does that effect accuracy ? I ask because at first glance it would seem obvious that it would . How ever the more I think about it I think maybe not so much .

If the firing pin pushes the case forward the case expands and sticks/seals to the chamber wall then case head stretches back to bolt face . Assuming that happens in that order then the case is securely centered in the chamber before the head is pushed back against the out of square bolt face . If that is the order of events , why would an out of square bolt face effect accuracy?

I don't know how much bolt face squareness affects accuracy. I believe it does, but then, that is the conventional wisdom. I believe that stiff structures will produce the best accuracy, because, the energy input varies so much, that a stiff, repeatable structure would vibrate more consistently. I have seen CAD/CAM models change frequency modes as energy inputs increase. It is very interesting to see a structure vibrate one way, and then as energy input increases, change the way it vibrates. Flexible structures will change modes quickly. At some energy input, the structure stops vibrating, because the structure is in pieces. I believe that stiff structures and consistent loading will lead to more repeatable vibrations but I can't prove it for firearms.

When it comes to rifles, I don't know how much lug contact is good lug contact. I have heard enough anecdotal tales about one lug bearing, and the other not, and accuracy was not good. But if both lugs bear, how much is enough? Don't know. Basically I tell my gunsmith if the lugs bear 70% or more, don't attempt to true or lap. I am more concerned with removal of the surface case, I don't want galling of a softer substrate material. Which has happened to me, a stainless rifle, the lugs were trued, and I had galling. I am basically not a fan of lug truing unless the things are way out of wack.

We do know that Benchrest types are insane about everything being perfect. Since I don't shoot Benchrest, I don't know if their beliefs are based in fact, in experiment, or Obsessive Compulsive Behaviors that the group think reinforces! Humans are so irrational, we do crazy things because everyone else does these crazy things and no one questions the Conventional Wisdom.

So, good question. Heck if I know.
 
And if that was 8 shots into that group size then it does not get any better than that, I would stop, go home and never shoot again!

My load f8r this bullet is 44grs of RL15. Best 5 shot group at 100yds was .307". After i shot that i packed up for the day.
Rob96 is

I got a .25 group at 110 which would be a tad less than .25 MOA. I kept shooting! I am abdicated.

On the other hand, I knew a guy who got into a school of Silver Salmon off a beach one year (70s) up here. He got one each cast, got 25 (limit I thin). He said he never went fishing again!

The kind of story you tend to skepticism on, but anything this guy said he delivered on (he was our gravel supplier). He gave us the best grade gravel he could for the bid (better than he had to) he knew it was the wrong stuff when we told him where it was going.

He then offered to grade out the rocks for a small fee (paid his fuel). I had never seen someone sort out rocks with a road grader, he got them all out and left them piled up at the end of the parking lot. I had seen some good grader operators but he was in a class all his own. If he said it I believed it, those kind of guys are gone for the most part now.

Ok, sorry to get off track.
 
Slamfire:

I think bench rest are insane .

Some guy interviews something like 6 or 8 of them to get the best practice of reloading.

Not a one agreed with any other one in major details.

I think someplace in there are basics but there also seems to be if you do it your way with precision you get as good a result as the guy who does it his way with precision.
 
RC20 I shoot Benchrest and I can say-Everyone has their own way of doing the same thing. It's not that one is better then the rest, It's just something that works for each person. I have always said- I have tried a million things, kept the ones I felt made a difference and forgot the rest. You just do what works in your gun with your situation. Bart and Kraigwy had schooled me a lot as have the people I shoot with, so, ya I guess you could say Benchrest is insane, but man is it fun. It's a never ending search for the best load.

I have always thought the same of you guys that can take a rifle, stand up, hold it and hit a target at 300 yards. That is something I can no longer do. Truth is, most of my Rifles I don't think most could as they all are in the 12 to 16 lb range
 
Rc20 Most of the B.R. shooters I shoot with do not do exactly what they say they do. The one who builds rifles will shoot you straight info because he wants all his rifles to shoot as well as possible. The rest hold some secrets back.
 
RC20, i'd have to check my target boards, but my next time out I shot at 250yds. If i remember correctly my groups were running around .568".
 
Just a foot note from an old gunsmith,
The 60s era M14 rifles have more chamber issue than a question of square bolt faces.
I *Believe* (opinion) its the way military production rifles were finish chambered back then,
The barrel was rough chambered, installed in the reciever, and the finish chamber was cut in a seperate process to allow the bolt to lock into battery.
If it locked, the headspace was considered correct.

Now comes the 'Opinion' part,
Knowing full well the chamber was final reamed from the breach,
And knowing it was free hand cut with a reamer & power motor that reached into reciever/chamber with the bolt out.

I looked into the angle the chamber was cut to the barrel.
Not good on some of them...

I didn't find bolt faces out of square, I found chambers out of square with bores and bolt faces.
There is even the mark where the chamber was shallow cut in the beginning sometimes they are so misaligned...

My Springfield M14 is dead square from the factory, both my AR10s are dead square, no issues with necks off center with them, others than the occasional Import ammo brass, and you don't know what import ammo started out at...

Just observations from an old guy, take it for what you will.
 
The 60s era M14 rifles have more chamber issue than a question of square bolt faces.
I *Believe* (opinion) its the way military production rifles were finish chambered back then,
The barrel was rough chambered, installed in the reciever, and the finish chamber was cut in a seperate process to allow the bolt to lock into battery.
If it locked, the headspace was considered correct.

The only M14 barrels I have seen were chromed. How did they short chamber these things and then cut them with a reamer?

On the second rebarrel of my favorite match M1a, I took it to the Springfield Armory building on Commercial Row at Camp Perry. they always have good deals on rebarreling during the National Matches.



The gunsmith installed a short chambered match barrel and set the headspace with a pull through reamer. Bolt face perpendicular is fine. In fact, all of Gene Barnett's barrels were made with a short chamber and the gunsmith was intended to use a pull through reamer to set the headspace. Rifles built this way have won National Matches.
 
Thank all. My comments on BR being insane was somewhat of a joke.

Not close to that league but I like punching small groups into targets and I can see the addiction (have a low degree of it)

I do wonder if some of it is just confidence that something worked out, felt good and the confidence adds to the focus and shooting accurately.
 
Thank all. My comments on BR being insane was somewhat of a joke.

I think benchrest shooters have a sense of humor, and some might agree, they are crazy, in their own ways.

Whenever the weather is too hot, I accuse the XTC shooters around me of being insane. It will be 90 + F weather, and we are wearing sweat shirts under quilted coats. If that ain't crazy, tell me what is!..

I don't think anyone on the line has disagreed with being called crazy. Someday, I am going to get a response "what made you think I was SANE?":eek:
 
Back
Top