Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters




sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
Any experience shooting modern .30-06 factory ammunition in a vintage M1895?
June 23, 2021
9:22 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2424
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

A friend asked me about this.  I’ve never owned a M1895 in .30-06.  I had a .30-03 and did shoot it, but I handload and I loaded it down – far short of factory .30-06 loadings.  My friend would appreciate knowledge, experience and advice on this.  

June 24, 2021
2:45 am
Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3360
Member Since:
November 7, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

No personal experience or knowledge but It’s my recollection the 1895 was not designed with today’s higher velocity (pressure) ammunition in mind. I know some use modern factory ammo in their old 1895’s but if I had one I wouldn’t. 

 

Mike

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
June 24, 2021
1:48 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 314
Member Since:
September 19, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Steve004, there has been a thread on this under the sights tab ref the model 21 receiver sight on a .30-06 carbine 1895.  Much as Mike said, it is not a good, long term practice to use today’s higher pressure cartridges in the older rifles.  Many already have excess headspace due to this practice and it will only get worse.  Handload, and use milder loadings.  If the rifle already has excessive headspace, reload the brass from that rifle without full length sizing or setting the shoulder back if possible and the brass will last longer.  Military brass has heavier material in the head area and holds up better, too.  But keep the loads reasonable for that rifle.  My take on it.  Tim

June 24, 2021
4:24 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2424
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

tim tomlinson said
Steve004, there has been a thread on this under the sights tab ref the model 21 receiver sight on a .30-06 carbine 1895.  Much as Mike said, it is not a good, long term practice to use today’s higher pressure cartridges in the older rifles.  Many already have excess headspace due to this practice and it will only get worse.  Handload, and use milder loadings.  If the rifle already has excessive headspace, reload the brass from that rifle without full length sizing or setting the shoulder back if possible and the brass will last longer.  Military brass has heavier material in the head area and holds up better, too.  But keep the loads reasonable for that rifle.  My take on it.  Tim  

Thanks Tim.  I’ll look for that thread.  I suppose shooters feel better using modern .303 British and .30/40 Krag ammo in their older rifles given these aren’t loaded as hot as the modern .30-06?  I would assume these two cartridges have less headspace issues given they are rimmed vs. rimless?

June 25, 2021
1:36 pm
Avatar
Great Basin
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 349
Member Since:
November 27, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Steve004,  If your friend isn’t a reloader, there are factory “reduced recoil” loads available.  I’ve shot both Hornady and Remington versions through my 1895’s.  They’re pleasant to shoot and I don’t worry about creating a headspace problem.  The ballistics are comparable to the 30-30.  They might be tough to find now, but they should start showing up again when this current ammo craze subsides.  Mark

June 25, 2021
1:39 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2424
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Mark Douglas said
Steve004,  If your friend isn’t a reloader, there are factory “reduced recoil” loads available.  I’ve shot both Hornady and Remington versions through my 1895’s.  They’re pleasant to shoot and I don’t worry about creating a headspace problem.  The ballistics are comparable to the 30-30.  They might be tough to find now, but they should start showing up again when this current ammo craze subsides.  Mark  

Thanks Mark.  I was not aware of that.  My friend is not a reloader.

June 25, 2021
9:32 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2809
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Mark Douglas said
Steve004,  If your friend isn’t a reloader, there are factory “reduced recoil” loads available.  I’ve shot both Hornady and Remington versions through my 1895’s.  They’re pleasant to shoot and I don’t worry about creating a headspace problem.  The ballistics are comparable to the 30-30.  They might be tough to find now, but they should start showing up again when this current ammo craze subsides.  Mark  

I posted this yesterday on another Topic.  These are loaded for the WW II M1 Garand and are somewhat reduced to not break the operating rod. 

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/winchester-victory-series-.30-06-springfield-ammunition-20-rounds-150-grain-m2-ball-fmj-2740fps-m1-garand-wwii-collector-wooden-box/FC-AMM-1027-642.html

These have 150 grain bullets and shoot at about 2700 FPS.  One other key is that the powder burn rate has been selected to keep the muzzle energy at around 2500 lb/ft.   Compare these figures to a loading chart for a standard 30-06 and you will see the difference.

June 26, 2021
3:51 am
Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3360
Member Since:
November 7, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

steve004 said

Thanks Tim.  I’ll look for that thread.  I suppose shooters feel better using modern .303 British and .30/40 Krag ammo in their older rifles given these aren’t loaded as hot as the modern .30-06?  I would assume these two cartridges have less headspace issues given they are rimmed vs. rimless?  

The 30-40 Krag and .303 British are very early smokeless cartridges and are indeed relatively low pressure rimmed smokeless cartridges. A rimmed cartridge has negligible headspace issues due to the cartridge design and lower pressures. Headspace issues are generally encountered with rimless cartridges that headspace on the shoulder due in part to the higher pressures provided by the shoulder. Some rimmed cartridges that utilize a shoulder have headspace issues but I’ve only seen it once and I may have been wrong about it then. 

I’ve often felt there should be “vintage” SAAMI specs for the 45-70, 38-55 and a few other hyphenated cartridges.In the case of the 1895 in 30-06 that could also be a good idea but not many 30-06 1895 owners are shooting their guns today. Personally, I don’t usually need all the modern 30-06 has to offer. It’s a shame your friend is not a reloader, Steve. The 30-06 is THE reason I jumped off the cliff into reloading and I’ve never looked back. As I mentioned in the other thread my 30-06 loads are a few hundred FPS under today’s factory loads and me and my rifles are OK with that. 

But then again, my entire 30-06 odyssey has been with post-64 Winchesters. 

Mike

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 628

Currently Online: 28 gauge, clarence, TR
61 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)


Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 16

Topics: 9182

Posts: 79061


Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1238

Members: 10632

Moderators: 4

Admins: 3


Top Posters:

1873man: 4927

TXGunNut: 3360

clarence: 3238

Chuck: 2809

twobit: 2717

steve004: 2424

Maverick: 1801

Big Larry: 1631

JWA: 1605

RickC: 1408