- Thread starter pmclaine
- Start date
That little guy???? I wouldn't worry about that little guy.
Gorgeous Garand! Nice shootin' too!
Technically, isn't that "Minute of German?" Oh, wait... sorry Bavaria.....
Cheers,
Sirhr
Gorgeous Garand! Nice shootin' too!
Technically, isn't that "Minute of German?" Oh, wait... sorry Bavaria.....
Cheers,
Sirhr
I don't know. It was on the rifle when I bought it. There are no armory marks it fits pretty well, not too oversize. The striping seems out of character for the straight grain wood the armory preferred. The front hand guard is even more striking as its cut from some crotch wood and it has the look of burled walnut.
Seems too pretty to be GI but I don't know the history of the rifle. It was just waiting in the rack at the local shop and it wasn't leaving my possession after I picked it up. It was the first rifle I had bought since high school as I reintroduced myself to rifles.
The serial number puts the rifle in the August/September 1943 date range. The SA 52 behind the rear sight indicates that it was rebuilt at Springfield Armory in 1952. I agree that the stock looks to be a replacement.
All you need now is a good 1907 sling and start shooting that rifle from position! Work up a good load and you can tighten up those groups some more.
Nice rifle!
All you need now is a good 1907 sling and start shooting that rifle from position! Work up a good load and you can tighten up those groups some more.
Nice rifle!
I moved the Turner M1907 to a different rifle. The 1952 marked MRT canvas sling is more appropriate for the SA-52 rebuild and will work just as well, a little bit more user friendly in fact, than the leather.
Most of my shooting these days is on my way home from work and my attire is not conducive to shooting in position. I do enjoy those days though when I can put on the 10X shooting coat, form a loop sling and shoot positions.
The 46 grains of 4064 with the 168 Nosler CC has been a good load. Yesterday was this rifles first trip to the range since Sept 16. I attribute the results to shooter and not enough time with this trigger. Im also using an LC 69 brass dissimilar from the KA 72 I built my load on. Shouldn't be that much difference though.
Ive got about 300 more .308 to load than Ill be retooling for 30-06. Next round is going to be 46.5 plus or minus of varget and probably same for 4064. I think a hair more velocity will be good.
Most of my shooting these days is on my way home from work and my attire is not conducive to shooting in position. I do enjoy those days though when I can put on the 10X shooting coat, form a loop sling and shoot positions.
The 46 grains of 4064 with the 168 Nosler CC has been a good load. Yesterday was this rifles first trip to the range since Sept 16. I attribute the results to shooter and not enough time with this trigger. Im also using an LC 69 brass dissimilar from the KA 72 I built my load on. Shouldn't be that much difference though.
Ive got about 300 more .308 to load than Ill be retooling for 30-06. Next round is going to be 46.5 plus or minus of varget and probably same for 4064. I think a hair more velocity will be good.
Another good load for short range work is a Speer 125gr TNT over 47-48gr IMR 4895. Light and accurate out to 200 yards. Very good load for offhand or rapid fire
I'll agree that those are accurate and easy to shoot. Just be ready when you get into an "as issued" comp and have to deal with the recoil... It's an eye opener!
I always thought in terms of 'Minute of Mo-Fo". I did the M-14 in Boot, trained on the M-1 In ITR, carried the M-14 in 'Nam, owned the M1A and a primo prewar 5-digit SA Garand, still own the primo.
I fixed mine up as an NRA Highpower Match Rifle (bedded, globe front, N/M 1/2MOA rear, 1" butt extension, Tru-Oil finish). Shoots MOA easy with the installed irons.
I use HDY brass, 168SMK at issue length, CCI BR-2, 48.1gr IMR-4064. Shoots just like 168 FGMM. With the 165 SGK, it's an A-number-one deer slayer, in a 22" M70 Sporter too.
Greg
I fixed mine up as an NRA Highpower Match Rifle (bedded, globe front, N/M 1/2MOA rear, 1" butt extension, Tru-Oil finish). Shoots MOA easy with the installed irons.
I use HDY brass, 168SMK at issue length, CCI BR-2, 48.1gr IMR-4064. Shoots just like 168 FGMM. With the 165 SGK, it's an A-number-one deer slayer, in a 22" M70 Sporter too.
Greg
Leatherneck Magazine pissed me off last month....
A Marine wrote in looking for affirmation.....at his local Legion or such place he was telling other members how when he was at Pendleton working the ranges he recalled the shooting team coming out with their M14's shooting the 1000 yard course. No one at the club believed 1000 yards was possible so he said he would write Latherneck and get the proof in print.
The idiot at Leatherneck published/replied to his letter something about the 14 being only a 600 yard rifle and the Marine had obviously misremembered. Their answer was kind of smart ass condescending to top it off.
I sent them in a hate letter telling MCA any more dumb responses like that and I'll subscribe to Army Times as their articles debating relaxing grooming standards to allow beards or filling the rag with 5 pages of debate about uniforms was more intelligent than their stupid answer in Leatherneck. I tried to find that video posted here within the last three months of the shooter going like 8/10 iron sights on a torso at 1000 with his SA M1A but couldn't find it.
Cant wait for my next Leatherneck because the first three pages of letters had better be Marines drilling the editor a new ass for his stupidity.
A Marine wrote in looking for affirmation.....at his local Legion or such place he was telling other members how when he was at Pendleton working the ranges he recalled the shooting team coming out with their M14's shooting the 1000 yard course. No one at the club believed 1000 yards was possible so he said he would write Latherneck and get the proof in print.
The idiot at Leatherneck published/replied to his letter something about the 14 being only a 600 yard rifle and the Marine had obviously misremembered. Their answer was kind of smart ass condescending to top it off.
I sent them in a hate letter telling MCA any more dumb responses like that and I'll subscribe to Army Times as their articles debating relaxing grooming standards to allow beards or filling the rag with 5 pages of debate about uniforms was more intelligent than their stupid answer in Leatherneck. I tried to find that video posted here within the last three months of the shooter going like 8/10 iron sights on a torso at 1000 with his SA M1A but couldn't find it.
Cant wait for my next Leatherneck because the first three pages of letters had better be Marines drilling the editor a new ass for his stupidity.
The shooting team may well have been using the "white box" ammo which was the 173 gr. That was M1 ball when loaded in a 30-06. It was definitely 1k capable in the 7.62x51.
Whoever jumped on that guy deserves to have his ass reamed.
Whoever jumped on that guy deserves to have his ass reamed.
Meet the editor of Leatherneck. Do you seriously expect her to run a staff that knows anything about an M14 that they can't either read in an FM or Google?
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/www.mca-marines.org\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/isotope_216x216\/public\/Mary%20Reinwald_0.JPG?itok=_Gs1mgYr"}[/IMG2]
Editor, Leatherneck - Magazine of the Marines
Director, Strategic Communications, Marine Corps Association & Foundation
A career administrative/manpower officer, Mary served as the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-1 for both 3d Marine Division and Marine Forces Command. She commanded the Personnel Administration School and was a faculty advisor for the Marine Corps Command and Staff College. She also served as the Head, Plans, Programs, and Operations, Officer Assignment Branch, Manpower Management Division, and the Chief, Resource Division, Command, Control, Communication and Computers, Headquarters Marine Corps. Her final tour in the Marine Corps was as Deputy Director, Prevention and Victim Assistance, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office at the Department of Defense.
Mary was commissioned through the Penn State NROTC program in 1987 and has a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. She holds a master’s degree in Strategic Studies from the Marine Corps University and is a graduate of the Marine Corps Command and Staff College and the Marine Corps War College. She retired from active duty in January, 2014. Mary’s husband, Col Shawn Reinwald, is also a retired Marine. They have four daughters and one son-in-law who is an Army officer.
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/www.mca-marines.org\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/isotope_216x216\/public\/Mary%20Reinwald_0.JPG?itok=_Gs1mgYr"}[/IMG2]
Editor, Leatherneck - Magazine of the Marines
Director, Strategic Communications, Marine Corps Association & Foundation
A career administrative/manpower officer, Mary served as the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-1 for both 3d Marine Division and Marine Forces Command. She commanded the Personnel Administration School and was a faculty advisor for the Marine Corps Command and Staff College. She also served as the Head, Plans, Programs, and Operations, Officer Assignment Branch, Manpower Management Division, and the Chief, Resource Division, Command, Control, Communication and Computers, Headquarters Marine Corps. Her final tour in the Marine Corps was as Deputy Director, Prevention and Victim Assistance, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office at the Department of Defense.
Mary was commissioned through the Penn State NROTC program in 1987 and has a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. She holds a master’s degree in Strategic Studies from the Marine Corps University and is a graduate of the Marine Corps Command and Staff College and the Marine Corps War College. She retired from active duty in January, 2014. Mary’s husband, Col Shawn Reinwald, is also a retired Marine. They have four daughters and one son-in-law who is an Army officer.
Well she is the mother to 5 girls......
I just looked up the email I sent to Leatherneck to see how angry I was when I wrote it.....
Looks like I did include a 1000 yard video....
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xu0LJOb-3d0
Looks like I did include a 1000 yard video....
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xu0LJOb-3d0
I was gonna say, at least one got it right
Added: Glad you remembered to include the 1000 yd. video. Senility doesn't care if you were Army or Marine. And yeah BTW my "touchy feelies" were terribly terribly hurt over your insult.
Haha Last edited:
I was gonna say, at least one got it right
A sense of humor is an endangered animal in the PC world. I'm glad it still lives here.
I think HE got it right twice.
I shot at 29 Palms one year, we the AK NG Rifle team were squaded next to the AMU team in the 1000 yard match. The 4 man AMU team shot M14s and had a score of 799/800. It was funny, the poor guy who dropped a point caught holly hell from his 3 teammates and their coach.
As a side not, though I was our team OIC/Coach, I wanted to score for the AMU team. As you know the scorer had to get right next to the scored team coach to compare scores. I listened to him make wind calls comparing them to mine. I learned a lot easedroping on that guy.
I got my new Leatherneck yesterday and I noticed the letters referenced two issues back so if there is to be a retraction or correction it will come n the June issue. I'll keep an eye on them for this "Huuuuuuuge" error. Under most circumstances I wouldn't care so much but where they left a Marine hanging for bragging rights for a rifle justly deserving the recognition I think it's worth the effort.
Well, pmclaine,.... Know that you have, not only Marine, but all components of Army behind you as well.
As you may well know, we love razzing you on all things Marine vs. Army ( and vice-versa), but we won't let bullshit like this stand on you or us!
As you may well know, we love razzing you on all things Marine vs. Army ( and vice-versa), but we won't let bullshit like this stand on you or us!
Im used to my daily doses of BS from the media but the service rags should do better even if it is a bunch of pogues writing the filler content or answering letters.
Leatherneck usually is good just for the historical pieces they do that rely on first person interviews.
It would have been nice if they had broadened their resource pool to include some real expertise.
