Jgun

Have you considered modifying the seating stem so that it doesn't contact the plastic point of the projectile? If it's already got clearance there, perhaps the bottom edge angle needs to be changed so that it can't "grip" the projectle?

I don't wish to take this thread further off topic, but, NJ, could you give any info on your double lugged M1A? Did you buy it as a double lugged gun? Is it a Springfield receiver? Do you know who did the work? My LRB receiver is rear lugged (I bought it that way from LRB) and I have come to realize that the lugged receivers limit the options of what stocks you can use. Most of the chassis stocks will not take a rear lugged receiver, and from what I've seen, it appears as though a double lugged receiver needs to be bedded into a stock that is milled out specifically for it (McMillian?) so that once you go that route you are stuck with a barreled action that can only be used in that specific stock. Have you ever done any research into the advantages of the front lug? I've read that they don't improve accuracy over that of a properly bedded rear lugged gun, but that the additional attachment point extends the length of time before the gun will require rebedding, any experience to share?

I have already pcked hp 10 lbs of IMR 4895. Have you ever compared that to the H4895? I've heard that some say the Hogdon is more consistant because the rods are shorter so it burns better and meters better, any personal experience?

I was thinking about it for the 300BLK upper I recently put together, but when I contacted the manufacturer, he told me that he had not done any testing on the 300BLk, and could not advise what the ideal port size in the plate should be. he offered to sell me an undersize plate that I could test and open up as needed to get the upper to finction as desired, but I don't feel like doing the R&D at this time so I may just throw a Syrac GB on it for now. maybe once I've got the configuration sorted out I'll try one. Like they say "only change one variable at a time in an experiment".

Anyone tried this one? A bit pricey but it might be worth testing. http://micromoa.com/

I'm gearing up to load for the M1A. I've read that they are sensitive to fast burning powders. I keep reading that IMR4895 and H4895 are the safest powders to use. I'm also eventually going to be loading for the M1 and have heard that Varget is most popular for that, although there seems to be some debate about whether it's a good idea to use it in the M1A. Can you tell me how 4064 compares with the 4895? Isn't it a faster burning powder and therefore possibly harder on the M1A operating system?

VERY NICE Rsquared, what can are you running?

Been busy so was not able to get back to check this before now. Thanks for the responses. Regarding the single vs progressive question. I believe that for match ammo and groups, the ability to measure each charge individually is helpful whether shooting from a bolt or semi auto. I do agree that some of the abuse the rd takes during loading in a semi, negates the extreme efforts some bench rest bolt shooters go to in order to make perfectly concentric rds. The reason I am exploring the benefits of loading high quality rds is because i have built two guns, one a .308 AR with a Lothar barrel that came with a very tight chamber. The other, an M1A that I've built using a krieger barrel that I've chambered myself using a match reamer to get a tight chamber of minimum headspace. Both of these guns are very selective of which factory loaded ammo will fit. The ones that I've found to be 100% reliable are the federal Gold Metal Match, and the American Eagle. Many of the other brands that fit in my other .308s will not chamber in these two. I've ordered the Redding small base full length sizing die and the micrometer seating die. I intend to load 168 and 175 SMKs. I believe that I will be more connected (read pay more attention) to the process if I use a single stage, at least initially. I'd like to see just how well I can get the two to group. Later on I intend to move to the progressive to see if there is any difference in the performance. I've heard that the tool heads from Whidden Gun works are a good addition to the Dillon 650 if going for precision rifle, and may try one. regarding the 300BLK competition loads, since the Safe Act, I have not been actively shooting the matches. Even before then, I had come to the realization that I prefered shooting my MATEN carbine in the matches and was using that. I'd like to build a suppressed 300 SBR and work on some load development for that, but that will have to wait until I've moved to a free state.

I'm thinking about purchasing a singlr stage press for precision .308 loading. I've already got a Lee single stage, nothing wrong with it, but thought I'd get something beefier. I've got a Dillon progressive that is supposed to work OK for .308, but, for right now, I'm considering the Forster coaxle. Are any members using this press? Any advice, can anyone suggest where to get the best price?

Thank you, Future plans are for a dedicated optic and a rear mono pod, but I'm presently looking for a Garand , so those items will have to wait for the time being.

I picked up a Lothar Walthar 20" Vartac barrel and have been very happy with the accuracy. It's a heavy profile, although not a bull barrel. Aside from the excellent accuracy, it was an in stock item so I had it within a week. They are also priced very reasonably. May not be the best choice for a hunting rifle but great for bench or prone.

And I'm not saying that there isn't any difference, but when I've measured the Armalite and DPMS bolts, I've been unable to find any measurable difference, Maybe it's in the angles of thebolt lugs.

I've got the Noveske 14.5" with the BABC on my MA TEN. I went with the complete AR 10 BCG, but unless I'm mistaken, all you need is to use the Armalite bolt, You should be able to use a DPMS carrier.

I think the lesson here is that if you buy a gun (or component) and you don't know the history, even if it is marked, you are running a risk. I had never given that much thought to the safety of no name barrels before, only reason I avoided them was due to accuracy concerns, but in the future I will be giving a little more thought to the subject. The same thing applys to buying ammo, I guess we take a lot for granted when someone asks us if we'd like to try their "new build". And keep that under your hat about the effectiveness of the Garand as a fighting weapon, we don't want to give the fools any more idea's, since we know, they can't think of anything on their own.

It says that the barrel had no markings of any kind. I had thought that Springfield marked their barrels. Do you have any memory of your M1A barrels being marked or bare?

Sounds like the gun had a defective barrel. Hoping to get a Garand this year myself. One of the few semi autos not considered an assault weapon by the idiots in NYS.(yet)

this is definitely one of the worst gun explosions I've seen. It's a miricle that the shooter wasn't seriously injured. www.thegunzone.com/m1akb.html

You could take a look at Superior weapons Systems 9" rail. I have used a couple of his rails and find them to be of high quality,

I'm not sure if you just got a bad one, but, aside from one friend that had a problem because the top screw of his pad was too long and protruding into the buffertube, yours is the first problem with the Ace fixed stock that I've heard of.

Although I think both stocks are good products, I belive that you're going to find that they are very different animals. The PRS, although a strong well built stock, is pretty heavy compared to most of the other options out there, colapsable or fixed, while the Ace, although it lacks tha adjustability of the PRS, is one of the lightest stocks that you can buy. I belive you will find that switching from the Ace to the PRS will have a noticable effect on the balance of your weapon. You may like it, but I bet it feels different. I have not tried one, but I've heard some good things about the new Magpul MOE fixed stock. As others have suggested, I'd contact Ace, I've found them to be a company that stands behind their products.

I've got one that I bought from someone in the Military that said he got it at the PX. Mine looks the same, but based on how it feels, I don't think it's the lightweight model. I think it's a good strong unit, but I think that if you're buying new, there may be better products in the same price range. I will say that the one I've got looks like it would be pretty indistructable.

I'm in search of a set of 30mm scope rings to mount an optic with a 50mm objective lens, so I need around 1.1/8" height from rail top to scope center. The Badger high rings with 1.06" would work, as well as the NF high rings with 1.125"

I don't wish to take this anywhere, but I was led to understand that the intent of the keymod was so that accessories could be mounted directly to the handguard without the need for an intermidiate rail and mount. I believe the idea was to get everything closer to the barrels bore axis, along with substantial weight savings. I don't know this to be a fact, but I'd assume that the target user would be LEO and military. If the accessories start being offered with the hole/studs to interface with the rails, and the Military and LEO embrace the concept, we may find that in time the pic railed handguards are phased out. I, personally prefer the rail to the keymod in appearance, although I must admit, I rarely make much use of the rails, and the guns I've handled with the keymod FF tubes (no rails or accessories mounted) are noticably lighter than any of my guns with a railed handguard but no accessories mounted.

I've been caught up with other things and have not monitored this. Thanks to all that replied. I was able to pick one up from Operation parts. Imshur, who's rail is that?