What was the Standard M-14 round and Why the 147gr for the FAL?

J

Jamie Young

New member
I'm new in the FAL and .308 arena since I recently acquired an STG58. I've noticed that most FAL rifles shoot better with heavier bullets than with the 147gr that seems to have been the standard round for most countries. Why is this?
Also what was the standard Bullet weight when the M14 was issued? Was it still the 168gr like the M1 Garand's?

[Edited by SodaPop on 05-14-2001 at 07:47 PM]
 
I think that ever since the 7.62x51mm was adopted by NATO in 1956 it was loaded with a 144 to 150gr. spitzer or more often a SBT bullet at about 2700-2800 fps from a 22" barrel. All metallic sights on NATO rifles are regulated for this standard loading. This duplicates (or improves, in case a SBT bullet is used) the ballistics of the 30-06 round used in the M1 Garand, a 150gr. spitzer at 2800 fps out of a 24" barrel. I understand the heavier 173gr. SBT at 2700 fps loading adopted in the 1920's were not intended for the M1, as they tended to beat the action and bend the op rod, that's why they went back in WWII to the old 150gr. spitzer bullet, now loaded to 2800 fps instead of 2700 fps as in the WWI.
 
No. In fact, the standard M1 Garand ammo used a 150gr flat bottomed bullet. You can still get them anywhere surplus. Not nearly as good as a boat tail. Cheers, Cryoman
 
The WW II era Mk II Ball ammo for the .30-'06 was loaded with a 153-grain Spitzer-type bullet.

From Phil Sharpe's "Complete Guide To Handloading"; 1937 information:

The original, 1903, load was a 220-grain bullet at 2,200 ft/sec with W-A powder. This hot nitroglycerine powder led to a barrel life of only 800 rounds.

In 1906 they went to a 150-grain bullet with Pyro DG powder, shortening the case neck at that time to today's ".30-'06".

In 1926, after experimentation with a 6-degree boat-tail of 170 grains, they went to a 9-degree boat-tail of 172 grains. Frankford Arsenal officially listed the bullet as 173, plus or minus 1.5 grains.

End.

I do not know for sure, but it is possible that the advent of the Garand led to the change from the heavier boat-tailed bullet to the Mk II Ball.

FWIW, Art
 
The "other" WWII round

It was common practice during dubya-dubya 2 for the troops to be issued the black-tip AP round.

That one was 168 grains. Having the steel or tungsten steel or tungsten carbide or whatever that thing was inside, it was longer than the M2 Ball bullet (loaded OAL, of course, was the same) and it had a very long bearing surface.

After WWII, the AP round earned a reputation for superior accuracy.

I'll have to look it up tonight, but I thought the M2 Ball (150-gr) was adopted in the late 1920s/early 30s after the troops were seen to suffer from recoil-battering while shooting the Springfield bolt guns. It seemed too bad that the M1 Ball (173) ammo was abandonded before the M1 Rifle was adopted, because the semi-automatic action takes out a lot of the "sting" from firing full power loads.

Edited to clarify M1 ammo and M1 rifle references.
 
Cheapo, read my post, above, about dates and weights.

Phil Sharpe is about as good an authority on such stuff as I know of; like Elemer Keith, He Was There.

Art
 
The 163 grain AP WAS an accurate round. We found that they were lots more accurate than M-2 ball, but not as good as M-72 Match. We got the brilliant idea of pulling the 172 grain Match ball and loading a pulled AP over it. Not quite as accurate as the straight match. In the 60's we were using the NM M-1 as our match rifle and the match ammo was a lil scarce (yes even for the military). We were using the M-2 ball for practice when we discovered the accuracy of the AP round. Someone advanced the idea that the reason for the accuracy of the AP was that the steel core had less chance of an air void then a lead core in the ball. Like the coonass says "Mais me I don know chere!" I do know that I picked up 500 of the pulled AP bullets for a song on E-Bay and am going to try them in a match case with 4895 to see what accuracy they can give.
 
Data

This is Ordnance data I have dated June 1981+revisions up to 1991 and also another manual which annotations appear after parens.
parens.() means date of revisions if revised

30/06:
Ctg. Ball M2 152 gn. at 2740fps 25m from muzzle.

Ctg. Armor piercing M2 165.7gn at 2715fps "

Ctg. Ball, Match M72 172gn 2640fps " (1982) later changed to 175.5gn 2640fps


7.62mm Nato:
Ctg. Ball M59 150.5gn at 2750fps 25m from muzzle (I believe this to be the original 7.62 loading).

Ctg. Armor Piercing M61 150.5gn at 2750fps " later changed to 149gn and possibly later even 147gn.

Ctg. Ball M80 146gn at 2750fps " later changed to 149gn and possibly later 147gn. Not sure about the 147 though.

Ctg. Ball,Special M118(Match) 172gn at 2640fps(1988)later changed to 175.5gn at 2550fps.

Ctg. Match M852 168gn Hollow Point 168gn at 2550fps (1984)


Data can be confusing because gov't changes ammo constantly
 
oops

I made a boo-boo on the 7.62mm AP bullet it should read:
Ctg. Armor piercing M61 150.5gn 2750fps 25M from muzzle-the rest was meant for the M80 Ball Ctg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top