I am new to the M1A rifle and recently bought a new SOCOM 16. I was not aware of it at the time but these M1As with the 16" barrels have a redesigned gas port which is apparently necessary for proper functioning with the shorter 16" barrel. Some shooters are complaining of cycling problems while others have no problems at all. I do not buy any factory ammo and jumped into this project with my handloads. From the beginning I have experienced cycling problems with 150 gr. bullets and 48.0 grs. of BL-C(2), which is the maximum charge per my Hodgdon 2007 manual. I have been advised that these rifles function better with the faster powders and I planned to buy some IMR 3031 but my supplier had only H335. It appears that H335 will be a good candidate but I am also amazed by how charges of this powder have been watered down over the years. My '07 manual shows a max of 44.0 grs. with the 150 gr. bullet, but then a friend just gave me an early 70's Lyman manual that quotes a max charge of 50.5 grs.!

So, the question is, have the modern reloading manuals been watered down so much that even max published loads with the slower powders (in this case BL-C(2)) will not cycle properly in the redesigned gas port of the SOCOM rifles? I am not interested in hotrodding my loads; all I want is proper functioning with the short barrel. What are the best powders for these rifles? Does anybody have any specific PROVEN handloads for the SOCOM rifles? And finally, is military 7.62x51 ammo loaded significantly hotter than commercial .308?

Dave Sinko

I am new to the M1A rifle and recently bought a new SOCOM 16. I was not aware of it at the time but these M1As with the 16" barrels have a redesigned gas port which is apparently necessary for proper functioning with the shorter 16" barrel. Some shooters are complaining of cycling problems while others have no problems at all. I do not buy any factory ammo and jumped into this project with my handloads. From the beginning I have experienced cycling problems with 150 gr. bullets and 48.0 grs. of BL-C(2), which is the maximum charge per my Hodgdon 2007 manual. I have been advised that these rifles function better with the faster powders and I planned to buy some IMR 3031 but my supplier had only H335. It appears that H335 will be a good candidate but I am also amazed by how charges of this powder have been watered down over the years. My '07 manual shows a max of 44.0 grs. with the 150 gr. bullet, but then a friend just gave me an early 70's Lyman manual that quotes a max charge of 50.5 grs.!

So, the question is, have the modern reloading manuals been watered down so much that even max published loads with the slower powders (in this case BL-C(2)) will not cycle properly in the redesigned gas port of the SOCOM rifles? I am not interested in hotrodding my loads; all I want is proper functioning with the short barrel. What are the best powders for these rifles? Does anybody have any specific PROVEN handloads for the SOCOM rifles? And finally, is military 7.62x51 ammo loaded significantly hotter than commercial .308?

Dave Sinko

With the M1 and M-14 based gas systems one must be carefull to mimic the original pressure curves to avoid bending your op rods. These folks have a very good reloading section here and are very helpfull!

http://www.m14tfl.com/upload/

The M1 is more prone to be problematic than the M14/M1A in regards gas port pressure. There are aftermarket gas port plugs for the M1 that bleed of gas pressure. The M14/M1A is more tolerant than the M1 rifle. The White designed gas system inspired the M14/M1a gas system which incorporates a gas cut of in the piston body and bleed in the housing body. The gas piston movement slaps the operating rod inducing movement in the M14/M1A system. The M1 is one unit and gas port sensitive which causes flexing of the operating rod.

That said I've used either IMR 4895 or 4064 other propellants of similar burn rate/pressure curve work also.

I have been posting on that forum but they do not have a specific handloading section. I have been told that the faster powders are a better choice but I was hoping for some specific loads and that some experienced reloaders on this forum could provide some more info.

The problem of bent op rods appears to manifest itself when bullets of 180 grs. or heavier are used. I have a hunch that I'll need to use the lighter bullets at slightly higher velocity and/or pressure to get proper cycling, all other factors being equal. Handloading for this rifle is a bit more puzzling than I had anticipated.

Dave Sinko

On my desk sets 7.62 MM Match XM 118 Lot LC 12010 Bullet 173Grs Velocity 2550-FPS 1963 Match. 175Gr and under with the proper propellant should no be problematic.

I've always had good luck with Varget or IMR 4064 in mine.

The million dollar question is "How many grains of the proper propellant?" Again, it is important to realize what works in the 22" barrel (or even the shorter Scout, for that matter) is likely NOT the optimum charge weight for the SOCOM. This seems to be the critical difference.

I had a chance to buy 8 lbs. of Varget but passed it over in favor of H355. I wasn't sure how it would burn in that 16" barrel.

I really like my SOCOM. It feeds all bullets with complete reliability, including those that are very short, light and of unconventional profile. But sometimes I don't get enough gas pressure to eject the fired cases. I'll probably have to bite the bullet and buy some surplus ammo and then break out the chrono for a more thorough comparison.

Dave Sinko

What effects the operation is the distance from the barrel gas port in respect to the chamber. If that distance is the same as a standard M14/M1A configuration then there should be no problem. The gas piston has a port that is in line with the barrels gas port. When the gas volume fills the cavity of the piston and cylinder housing the piston moves reward cutting of gas flow from the barrel gas port. Further movement allows gas to bleed to atmosphere as the piston uncovers the bleed port in the cylinder housing.

Also note the operating rod cam grooved surface allows movement of the operating rod to the rear before the cam groove inclined surface contact the roller cam on the bolt.

My opinion Varget, Reloader, IMR4895, and IMR 4064 are all good propellants but with the two IMR powders being the most satisfactory in the M14/M1A application.

In other words use a standard charge weight and work from there.

I've got 2 M1A's, a loaded standard model and a SOCOM II with extended rail. They're next on my list to start reloading for, so I'll be following this thread. You might want to check out the M14 Forum, they have an "Ammo Bunker" section which includes handloading:

http://www.m14tfl.com/upload/

Also check out different loading manuals. I know that my Hornady manual has sections specifically for the M1 and M14 service rifles.

I've had a Socom II for a few years now. It's digested nothing but my handloads using Varget and BLC-2.

All powder charges were on the lower end of the scale, and moving to mid scale.

Bullet weights were from 150 gr Hornady Interlocks to Hornady and Speer 168 gr BTHP's.

No problems whatsoevah!

BTW, the 150 gr interlocks produced patterns better suited for a shotgun. But hey...they functioned flawlessly

The SOCOM models allegedly have a larger gas port which is supposed to generate proper gas pressure in the shorter barrel. The theory is that some loads which will cycle properly in the 22" barrel may not cycle properly or may be borderline in the 16" barrel.

What concerns me is that I have been having gas pressure type problems with BL-C(2) and 4064. I guess I'll continue to increase the powder charges slightly and see what happens.

Dave Sinko

I got some data for IMR 4064 that's worked well in my Remington 740 30-06, but if that short barrel is an issue, look up data for 4895 and an even faster powder - 4198.

If you hit a wall, you might want to ask your question here:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/index.php

I have a Socom II I use H335. My favorite load is 45 grains of H335 with the Speer 130 gr Hollow point bullet. Also I have a 18.5 and a 22 inch MIA this load works equally well in all three rifles. I think the problems/handicap of the 16" barrel are really not an issue in any way.

I really like 4198 in my .45-70 Guide Gun and I notice that it is a good powder for cast bullets in the .308 Winchester. I had assumed it is not the best choice for jacketed bullet loads in the .308.

Actually, I AM working on cast bullet loads for the M1A but I am getting sidetracked here. My goal was to first work up a jacketed bullet load that is both accurate and cycles properly. I have about 700 once fired cases that are waiting for the proper load once I find it. They will then be stored away. The next project will be developing a cast bullet load for cheap practice and USPSA Multigun competition, but the cast bullet loads are a different animal altogether.

Dave Sinko

OK, Duskykiller, I see your post and that you are also using H335 in a SOCOM. Are you using this powder with either 110 or 150 gr. bullets? I do not have any 130 gr. bullets.

I like the 16" barrel but that larger gas port seems to be causing my some problems, at least with some of the loads that I am using.

Dave Sinko

I don't know about the SOCOM version, but the original M-14 was designed to work around IMR-4895 powder. If I were you, I'd try it before anything else. IMR-4895 also goes through most powder measures quite consistently. IMR-3031 and IMR-4064 don't go through a measure worth a darn!

__________________
SWCA 2379

Sir, FWIW, my standard .308 loads are Sierra 168s and 175s over 41.0 to 41.5 grains of IMR 4895 in GI cases. These are typical match loads for .308 M1s and M14s. How well they'd work in a Socom I don't know, but they'd at least be a starting point. In my rifles, they clock around 2,550 fps.

GI 7.62 is loaded a bit lighter than most commecial .308. M80 ball is a 147-grain bullet at a nominal 2,800 fps from a 22-inch barrel. M118 and M852 use heavier bullets (173s and 168s respectively) at a nominal 2,550 fps. When you're looking at load data, start with loads in this same general range.

Regarding the cycling problems, I'm not sure a faster powder is the answer. I suspect it might make it worse. Was it me, I'd experiment with 4895. If you can't get the gun to function with that, I'd suspect a gun problem rather than a load problem.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

Dave

I have used H335 with 110 bullets and several 150 bullets as well as 168 Match with no problem.
I prefer H335 in 308 over all other powders.

Many problems with MIA rifles are not being properly lubed. I purchased my Socom II used it came to me filthy. Once cleaned and lubed it has run 100%.

Is that the information from Springfield Armory concerning the gas port size or a supposition from the multitudes? If that’s the truth then the porting in the piston and the gas cylinder bleed off port would have to have been changed also.

One occurrence that can happen is the gas cylinder housing not being properly aligned with the gas port in the barrel. Is the gas port spindle on the gas cylinder housing fully open?

Prevailing opinion seems to be that the faster powders work better in the SOCOMs. To me much of this is speculation and I have not seen anybody with any degree of technical expertise clear the air once and for all. Some (like me) have cycling problems with these guns while others don't. I am at a bit of a disadvantage here because I have never owned or shot a full size M1A and I do not have or use any factory loaded or surplus ammo.

I have never shot bullets heavier than 165 grs. through this gun and my powder charges have never exceeded maximum in any of the newer loading manuals. I do not see how it's possible that I could have a bent op rod unless it came from the factory that way. The M14 forum has some excellent pieces written by Gus Fisher, who has a great deal of expertise with these rifles. I will re-check some of his postings.

The matter of cleanliness is also puzzling to me. I bought this rifle the day after Christmas last year and the weather here in PA was very cold. My first cycling problems showed up very quickly in the frigid weather and I assumed it was because the heavy grease or lube that Springfield Armory used was causing the gun to run sluggish. I then disassembled the rifle, completely degreased it and then applied Militec-1 with a heat gun. It seemed to run well but then the cycling problems quickly reappeared. Another potential problem is that the gas plug does have a tendency to shoot loose. I don't know how loose it needs to be before the gun will start to cycle poorly. A quarter turn? Would that be all it takes? At this point I don't know.

At this point I will completely clean and lube the rifle and check the tightness of the gas plug after literally every shot. Considering that this is a proven battle rifle, I do not believe that cleanliness should be an issue, since I am certainly not running it dry or filthy.

Trying surplus ammo would probably be a good idea. There is always the possibility that the problem could be my ammo, but when I am using maximum published charge weights in carefully prepared ammo, I have to wonder. I will have to see what the next range session brings.

Dave Sinko

You say will not cycle properly. What malfunction are you getting?

Sir, the old Jouster.com CSP boards are now being hosted at Milsurp.com. (Click the link.) Gus Fisher is there on the M1/M14 board--you might ask him directly. http://www.milsurps.com/forumdisplay.php?f=73

BTW, a loose gas cylinder plug will most definitely cause short cycling.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

The gun is now clean and properly lubed. The gas plug has been tightened and will be carefully monitored. As for the exact malfunctions, I've had a few instances where the gun will attempt to cycle but the bolt does not come back far enough to eject the fired case or even attempt to chamber the next round in the magazine. It then re-chambers the fired case. And I've had a few stovepipe type stoppages where I can see the fired case isn't being thwown clear of the action. I don't see these as extraction or ejection problems, but one of gas pressure. These happened with some heavier loads that were right around maximum with BL-C(2) and 110, 150 and 165 gr. bullets. I have been advised that my loads may be too hot for the gas system, so I will reduce my loads a few grains and start over.

The question of gas port size seems to be "common opinion" and I am not aware of any statement by Springfield Armory to the effect that it is different than the full size rifles.

I hope I can get to the bottom of this quickly. I really do like this rifle and am impressed by the fact that it feeds everything with complete reliability.

Dave Sinko

Worked for a State Agency that issued M-14's (semi only) to Officers if they requested one and would do the Qual course. There ARE a few things to keep in mind.

There is a proper way to clean and LUBE the M1A/M-14's. Not everyone took this to heart and had some problems. I'd research how to properly clean and lube.

Should you wish to reload for them, your reloads also require some special care. Not any old .308 Win reload will work to the optimum either. We had a few guys loading totally inappropriate powders at too high a pressure level and the result was a few cracked bolts.

Personally I think your problem is your trying to load too light a bullet...100 and 110 grain. I'd look into std 147 or 150 gr military FMJ's.

http://m14tfl.com/upload/

Thats the link to the Battle Rifles M-14 Forum. I would visit them and post your question there. I'd be VERY surprised if someone doesn't get you straightened out and quickly. A lot of experience on the site.

My M1A digests IMR-4895 loads with 147 gr FMJ slugs or 168 gr sierra Match BT's with ease. Just like it was designed to do.

FN in MT

If this problem is still happening. I would contact Springfield and talk to them. Their service is world class. They will fix it correctly. Yes shipping it back is a pain but it would be worth it.

I have come to the stark realization that my problems are due to improperly sized brass. I will need to get a small base sizing die for any of my loads to function properly. I did not realize how critical this is for proper extraction and ejection in a semiauto rifle. Shame on me!

I have learned a valuable lesson here...

Dave Sinko

My own results today from taking my M1A SOCOM II to the range with my own handloads. All loads were done with H-4895 starting low and working my way up. Strings were 5 rounds loaded in the magazine of the same powder charge.

Rounds were loaded to 2.745 COL, bullets were Speer 150gr. BTSP in Federal cases with CCI standard rifle primers. The loads were shot for a function test only and not for accuracy. Conditions at the range were very windy and the ghost ring sights of the SOCOM II do not lend themselves to target work.

38.0 grains, all 5 rounds functioned flawlessly.

39.7 grains, 1st two rounds had to be hand cycled. The bolt was still locked up in battery with empty shell case in the chamber. Shell case was ejected manually and next round was chambered. Last 3 rounds cycled flawlessly. Cases showed no signs of overpressure.

41.4 grains, 1st two rounds had to be hand cycled. The bolt was still locked up in battery with empty shell case in the chamber. Shell case was ejected manually and next round was chambered. Last 3 rounds cycled flawlessly. Cases showed no signs of overpressure.

43.1 grains, all 5 rounds functioned flawlessly. Cases showed no signs of overpressure.

What this all means I have no clue. I just found it strange that the low and high powder charges functioned flawlessly while the 2 intermediate loads needed to be hand cycled for the first 2 rounds.

The rifle and magazine that I was using have functioned flawlessly in the past with factory ammo. I've fired Federal American Eagle 150gr. FMJ BT's and Magtech 150gr. FMJ's through it. Hopefully I'll be able to obtain Varget or BL-C2 to try out for handloading in this rifle.

Sir, it's actually unusual to need a small-base resize die for semi-autos. None of my match rifles (M1s and ARs) or "as issued" semi-autos (M1s, ARs, M1As) has required a small-base re-size die. Nor do any of the other high power guys I know have to use small-base dies.

That said, I've read and heard so many reports of tight chambers in SA Inc. guns in recent years that it seems a common thing in those guns. Perhaps that's just how they do them, or maybe the chamber reamer used on your gun was just sharpened one time too many.

If you haven't done so already, check the gun's headspace. Short headspace is more dangerous than long headspace and can cause the problems you describe. If the headspace is incorrect, have SA Inc. fix it under their lifetime warranty.

Going back to brass and re-sizing, how do you re-size your brass now? Are you full-length re-sizing or just neck-sizing? Just so you know, neck-sizing is a no-no in gas guns; doing so can lead to problems similar to what you describe.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

I loaded and fired some 30 rounds with the RCBS small base sizer die. Things were going well until about the 25th round when the fired case wasn't fully pulled out of the chamber and there was a stoppage. A few of the others just barely ejected properly. I have been using 110 gr. RN because I'm tired of wasting good 150 gr. bullets. The above post wherein five rounds were fired with varying powder charges seems to be what I am experiencing. Why in the world would some of those mid-level loads need to be hand cycled? Maybe you are not loading enough test rounds and if you loaded more the results would be different? I fired only 20 rounds of factory loaded surplus ammo and they all cycled perfectly with the same ejection characteristics. Could it be a matter of how the chamber was cut? Would that affect the ejection and cycling? The whole thing is very bizarre and very aggravating.

I'm not one to send a second rate firearm back to the same factory that couldn't make it right in the first place. But I'm not so sure I have a second rate firearm. I know a very capable local gunsmith who is well versed in military rifles and the M1A. I'd just as soon pay him to evaluate it and make it work properly, if that's what it takes. I'm taking great care to resize my brass properly and use a wide range of powders and charges. Nothing helps. If I'm doing something wrong, I'd really like to know what it is.

Dave Sinko

Sir, a too-tight chamber can definitely affect cycling.

If the headspace is short, pressures go up (sometimes WAY up), causing sticky extraction. Too small in diameter, and the chamber may not admit in-spec rounds; or worse, the cartridges are "hammered" into the chamber and swaged down by the cycling of the bolt. This also can cause sticky extraction.

Frankly, I think it's a mistake to test with 110-grain bullets and a zillion different powders. The system was originally designed around 150s and IMR 4895; that's what you should be testing with.

Was it me, I'd try 150s and 4895 with data that indicates 2,800 fps from a 22-inch barrel. About 43.0 grains of powder should do it. (Check your manuals, of course.) If the gun won't run with that load, take it to your 'smith for evaluation.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

You have just convinced me to seek out a pound of IMR 4895. I'll give that a try with some of my 150 gr. bullets. Other SOCOM owners report good success with 110 gr. bullets, Hornady TAP to be more specific, so I figured I should be able to get those to function too. I'll have to go back to square one and start with the basic 150 gr. load though.

I loaded some 168 gr. Match Kings for a friend who has an older SOCOM II. He's waiting for a scope that he ordered, so soon I'll find out if my loads work in his rifle. That may not diagnose my problem, but it could still be very revealing.

Dave Sinko

FWIW, I just picked up a 2lb. can of Vihta Vouri N135 to try in my SOCOM II. When I was setting up my press to run a batch, I noticed that my sizing die had backed out from the toolhead.

This could explain the erratic functioning I had on my first attempt at handloads of H4895 with this rifle. I did have a ring of case lube just forward of the shoulder that was a PITA to wipe off the cases in that first batch. Something you might want to check on your die setup. I'm going to try another batch of H4895 loads as well as the N135 now that I have the sizing die re-adjusted.

I'll post up later in the week after I've had a chance to get out to the range and let you know how it worked.

David If you have not solved your SOCOM problem, or even if you haved you might want to try the following load.

A have been using this load in 308/7.62 rifles since 1975.

It works in M1 A's 308 M1 Garands, FN FAL's H&K 91's, Savage 99's bolt rifles, hunting and sniper and competition.

I have yet to find a 308 rifle that will not shoot this load pretty good and most shoot it as well as factory Federal 168gr match.

The bullets, Sierra 168 Match, 165 Spz, or the 165 HPBT Gameking, or the Nosler 165 Ballistic Tip, or 165 Nosler Partition.

The Powder IMR 3031, use 39.5 grains, CCI or Federal standard rifle primers.

Give this load a try.

I mostly use the Sierra 165 HPBT Gameking, it is a great hunting bullet, and feeds in semiautos perfect.

Go here to see information about the .308 Winchester versus the 7.62 NATO: 7.62x51mm NATO or 308 Winchester? What's the Difference?

The .308 cartridge is loaded to higher pressure than the 7.62 NATO.

Another vote for 4895.

Full length re-size, small base die unnecessary; 40 gr. 4895 w/ 147-173 gr. bullet. Classic starting load. So good that it is often the only load ever tried.

Regards,

Tam 3

What Ron said! If your rifle does not function with this load, it needs a return trip to Springfield Armory. ANY factory can have problems with their product, and while we may be indignant about that, as consumers, it is more important to get on with the job of getting things working properly.

Though Ron did not mention it, you might get a loaded ammunition gage and check your assembled rounds, if you are not doing this already.

Are you using good, hard brass? M-1A shooters seem to prefer Lake City.

I have an M1A that I did not have good success handloading and have stuck with MilSurp and been happy with the 1-2" groups. Based on all the info posted here, I will be trying to load some rounds up for better results!

Thanks for all the info!

If you have a 308/7.62 rifle that is giving you accuracy or functioning problems, just buy some 168gr Federal Match.

If it does not shoot that stuff pretty good, with 100% reliability, then there is something wrong with your rifle.

I can say the same thing about "MY" reloads with 38.5gr of IMR 3031 with a 165/168gr bullets....

But the Federal factory load leaves no doubt.

I have never seen an M1 A, whether it was a standard, Match, Super Match, or a custom made M1 A or M14 that did not shoot my 39.5gr load with a 168gr Sierra Matchking, or the other 165gr bullets listed very good.

However for your ease of mind, just get a few boxes of Federals 308 168gr Match ammo.

Shoot that in your rifle, and tell us how it does.

I already sold this rifle. I noticed that all my resized brass would fit in the chamber with room to spare, but some of them were very tight once the bullets were seated. Either the chamber was a bit tight or the necks were getting thick. I did try most of the powders that were suggested here and nothing helped. I suspect my problems were brass related and I just can't tolerate that.

As an aside, I took my brass that had been abused in the M1A and converted it to .300 Savage for my Model 99. I threw out those with loose primer pockets and the rest functioned with perfect reliability.

Dave Sinko