Quote:
Originally Posted by red-beard
Talk to me more about this. I am already set up with the CMP and can get a low grade rifle, a new barrel and new stock for cheap. Who does this comversion work and how much would it cost?
|
Sure I can.
Converting a .30-'06 Garand to .308 does require a barrel change, and a slight modification to the ejector spring (not essential but a prudent thing to do). A spacer block in the mag well (to prevent loading .30-06 cartridges), if required. You might have to enlarge the gas port by a few thousands to ensure reliability.
If you read the CMP forum pages - or do some Google searching you will find lots of information on converting a Garand over to shoot 7.62x51(.308) if you want to. Basically it involves replacing the barrel.
http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/ProductDetail.aspx?p=16634&title=M1%20GARAND%20STANDARD%20GRADE%20BARREL
http://www.northridgeinc.com/m1_garand.htm
From:
bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: M1 Garand in 7.62NATO/308WIN
Date: 10 Jan 1994 16:39:15 -0500
RGIBSON@ua1vm.ua.edu wrote:
: What is the opinion of converting one of the "Blue Star" M1 Garands
: over to 7.62NATO/308WIN?
In the early 1960, the US Navy Rifle Team started converting 30 caliber
M1s to 7.62mm NATO with great success. The only difference between the
two cartridges versions was the Springfield Armoury (MA) barrel's gas
port was a tad too small. With the lower port pressure from the 7.62mm,
the port had to be drilled out several thousandths to ensure reliability.
Magazine area length for the 7.62mm versions caused no problem whatsoever.
As the cartridge is held by its extractor groove by the 8-round clip, no
forward-shifting happened at all. In fact, this extra magazine length
was a help for accuracy. Handloads could have their bullets seated out
a few thousandths short of the lands; even with considerable throat
erosion. Rounds with an overall length of 2.90-in, or more, was oft
times done when 190-grain bullets were used. But continued use of these
converted M1s eventually required a plastic magazine filler; seems too
many folks tried to chamber a 30 caliber round in the shorter 7.62mm
chamber. The filler prevented a clip full of .30-06 ammo from being
loaded. With this exception, clipped 7.62mm ammo works just fine. In
fact, 7.62mm rounds are actually better in M1 rifles. When a clip full
of 'em is loaded, their larger diameter spreads the clip further apart
causing more pressure against the clip's sides. When the clip bottoms
and trips the bolt release, the bolt goes forward, then hangs up on the
clip's top round. This means you gotta give the operating rod handle a
thump with the heel of your hand to load the first round. No more of
those `M1 thumbs' from loading a full clip; something that oft times
happens with 30 caliber M1 rifles.
Seems the success the Navy had with these rifles in competition became
the envy of the other services. Coupled with the improved parts fitting
and assembly procedures, these 7.62mm NATO M1 rifles were for several
years the most accurate service rifle in the country. The US Air Force
contracted the US Navy to build their match-grade M1 rifles; the US Marine
Corps Rifle team had the USN armorers come to Quantico MCB and show their
armorers how to modify their match conditioning procedures. But the Army
Rifle team wanted no part of it; they were heavily involved in figuring
out how to match condition their new service rifle; the M14.
BB
There are numerous reasons for going this route:
The M1Garand handles differently than any other rifle.
It could be considerable cheaper than a more modern “spray and pray” rifle.
It would be a fun project, I have done several and it is very satisfying.
Parts are very cheap.
Clips are $1 versus $$$$ for magazines.
“Make every round count” is always better than “count the number of rounds”, which means your marksmanship will improve.
Hand-loading options are better than any other semi-auto rifle. This allows you to hand-load hunting loads, target loads, etc.