PDA

View Full Version : Please tell about this M1A...


Glennster
August 4, 2010, 06:01 PM
This thing looks to have had a green paint job, then someone went over that with black. I was told that it may have been an M14 in a prior life, I hear it may have been a parade rifle..... I borrowed it from a guy and I might buy it, but I'm not sure what I'm getting into or what it's worth.....
Please help if you can........THANKS!
http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100884.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100886.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100889.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100892.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100893.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z126/glennster_photos/P1100895.jpg

THORN74
August 4, 2010, 08:23 PM
the stock lookslike GI issue M14 stock.... that gap u see is for the selector switch. its definately not the original stock. M1a's dont come with the cut out from SA.

the green paint may be a prior camo job? not sure on that one.

and the inside of the handguard troubles me too.... mine isnt painted black, but rather solid black plastic all the way thru

dont buy it w/o firing it first. also check the bore and FP hole ...if it was a parade rifle they were likely welded shut

lastly check m14 firing line forums (http://www.m14tfl.com/upload/index.php) i would repost ur questions and pics there ...they have a ton o knowledgeable guys over there

roklok
August 4, 2010, 08:24 PM
Looks like a standard SA M1A to me, not an M14. Probably worth what your run of the mill M1A in like condition would bring. The receiver is not milled for the full auto parts like an M14 or selective fire M1A.

roklok
August 4, 2010, 08:25 PM
Some Springfield Armory M1As did indeed come with the selector cut out in the stock. Back in the early to mid 90s I saw several brand new M1As at dealers with stocks with the selector cut out. The stocks were slimmer than the standard wood stocks from Springfield. Was told that they were produced in limited numbers by Springfield Armory.

Glennster
August 4, 2010, 09:04 PM
It is thought (by the current owner) that maybe it '' WAS '' an M14, but had an M1A semi auto only receiver put on it to make it a civilian model. Heck, I don't know if that was even done.....
Maybe this old girl is just a pile of parts put together over time by a guy that picked up parts a gun shows.........
This thing is a real mystery to me.

kraigwy
August 4, 2010, 09:49 PM
I got my M1A in 1977, four digit serial number (0068XX). It came with a surplus M14 stock with the cut out. All the parts excluding the receiver were USGI surplus parts including a NM barrel. (The rest of the gun was a standard grade). Mine has been converted to a Super Match by Gene Barrnet, (Barrnet Barrels) who at the time was working the pistol armor's van for the Wilson Matches (NG Championships).

SA did sell receivers as well as USGI parts, (lots of people sold the parts). Based on the pictures it looks like a cobbled together with an assortment of parts. I don't recall seeing any cut up SA M1A receivers, the only cut/welded ones I've seen were M14s.

Looking at the serial number I would guess its an early to mid 80s M1A. Back then (pre NM AR days) they were the pick for high power shooters and SA was doing their best to keep up with demand so I doubt they cut their receivers up for sale.

As far as the paint, the 80s was between wars so there were a lot of Commie Killer Would Be's that just had to have a gun all commo'ed up so they could be "tactical".

That's about all I can say without taking a closer look. I have all the armor's gages for the M14/M1A. If I was closer I'd have you bring it by for a good going over. I still have a few parts laying around.

hank327
August 4, 2010, 09:53 PM
It is thought (by the current owner) that maybe it '' WAS '' an M14, but had an M1A semi auto only receiver put on it to make it a civilian model.

It wasn't an M14, it's an M1A. That is an M1A receiver, you can tell by the trademark symbol on the heel of the receiver. The receiver is what is considered the firearm and not any other part. Lots of M1As were assembled using actual surplus M14 barrels, trigger groups, operating rods etc. In fact many earlier M1As were all surplus military M14 parts except for the receiver. Those are very coveted rifles now but they were always M1As, not M14s.

azredhawk44
August 5, 2010, 01:00 AM
Hank:

An M1A is an M14.

Not all M14's are M1A's.

Not all M14's are automatic.

Here is my custom NM Armscorp M14:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p17/azredhawk44/M14/100_0181.jpg

Yes. It's an M14. No, it does not go rat-a-tat-tat.

M1A is a copyrighted/trademarked monicker of Springfield Armory, Incorporated, for their M14 pattern rifles.

[/pet peeve]
;)

Kmar40
August 5, 2010, 10:02 AM
AR15s aren't M16s and your M14 look-alike isn't an M14.

The Law
August 5, 2010, 06:16 PM
AR15s aren't M16s and your M14 look-alike isn't an M14.

Wouldn't that depend on your definition of an "M14"?

It's clearly not an M1A (as stated above - proprietary moniker), but it may be an M14.

Edward429451
August 5, 2010, 06:44 PM
For all practical purposes, the M1A's are M14's. The M14's being FA means nothing because FA weapons are not practical. JMO.

Loader9
August 5, 2010, 07:33 PM
What you have there is a 1995 M1A made by Springfield as an M1A. It has never been an M14. Springfield used a lot of military parts back then and they also used the military stocks. It most likely has a 1:10" twist chrome lined barrel but I'd gauge it as they also made them with a 1:11" twist. Because the use of military parts including the op rod and other action parts, you need to be real careful about the ammo you use. The timing on this particular weapon is critical and you should use only ammo marked as 7.62x 51, not 308. It has nothing to do with the pressure but with the burn rate of the powder used. If you intend to reload for it, you'll need to stay with the 4895 or BL-C2 powders. M1As marked as 308 can use any 308 ammo but yours being an early one will suffer op rod damage if it has a steady supply of 308 ammo. It also appears to be a nice specimen. Too bad it's not a Devine M1A but it is an early Springer.

azredhawk44, you made me get out my Armscorp M1A that's also marked as an M14. Mine is all military except the receiver which is probably like yours. Fun and reliable shooters. I was chatting with Elmer Balance about mine and he said the Armscorp receivers are far more stable and stiff than the receivers he or Springfield made. Turning one into a match rifle was real simple and better accuracy could be gotten from one. I've turned down well over $2500.00 for mine and that was before the black rifle market took off.

Glennster
August 6, 2010, 05:21 AM
I did buy it, actually traded for it. I spent a little time last night cleaning the two ugly paint jobs off it. I used acetone to get the paint off, it looks like the acetone is not hurting the parkerized finish. iI hope to have her looking like new real soon.
I have a good size pile of LC Match brass, that should work nice for loading this thing.

Loader9,
Do you have a pet load you like for the 1:11 twist???

Iron Feliks
August 6, 2010, 10:34 PM
I would have the headspace checked before I fired it.

Sincerely,

Iron Feliks

44 AMP
August 7, 2010, 04:46 AM
Point of order, Gentlemen:

The M14 is a select fire rifle, made for, and used by the US military. M14s have never been released for civilian sale, because they are, under the law, machineguns. Even if they do not have the full auto parts, receivers made as GI M14s are legally machineguns in the eyes of the BATFE. They have had a policy for many years of "once a machinegun, always a machinegun". The only exception to this seems to be a gun they declare legally DWATed.

There are, I believe, a handful of legally registered M14s in the NFA civilian registry, but there has never been a "semi auto" verson of the actual GI rifle released for sale to civilians.

Springfield Armory (and some others) began selling "M14" rifles by using all GI surplus parts on new made (semi auto) receivers. They are not M14s but are M14 pattern rifles, just as an AR 15 is not an M16. Springfield Armory named their rifle the M1A. Other makers have called theirs M14s, or something similar, but they are not actual M14s, only M14 pattern rifles, with semi auto receivers.

I have an M1A, bought in the mid 80s, and it has the cutout in the stock for the M14 full auto parts. The stock is USGI surplus, as are all parts on my rifle, except the receiver.

It is convenient to call these rifles M14s (or M1As) just as it is to call 1911A1 pattern pistols "1911s". But one should know the difference.

roklok
August 7, 2010, 05:22 AM
Agreed, an M1A is not an M14. Not to confuse things here, and a bit off topic, but I have seen written twice here in this thread that an AR-15 is not an M16. That is certainly true for the most part, but......a few AR-15s ARE M-16s. I was issued an M16 that was also marked Colt AR-15 on the receiver. The upper was M16A1 configuration, can't remember if the lower was stamped M16 or M16A1.

Airborne Falcon
October 22, 2010, 12:02 PM
Hank:

An M1A is an M14.

Not all M14's are M1A's.

Not all M14's are automatic.

Here is my custom NM Armscorp M14:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p17/azredhawk44/M14/100_0181.jpg


azredhawk .... just wondering, but what is the difference between your Armscorp receiver, and mine?

http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/xx7/gallopazzesco/Mobile%20Uploads/utf-8BSU1HMDAwNTgtMjAxMDAzMTAtMDEwM.jpg
http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/xx7/gallopazzesco/Mobile%20Uploads/utf-8BSU1HMDAwNjAtMjAxMDAzMTAtMDE0O.jpg

SR420
October 22, 2010, 12:09 PM
Most Norinco and Poly Tech rifles have M14 stamped on them, some have nothing stamped on them.

http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/albums/civilian/PolyM14S04.jpg

azredhawk44
October 22, 2010, 12:28 PM
They are not M14s but are M14 pattern rifles, just as an AR 15 is not an M16. Springfield Armory named their rifle the M1A. Other makers have called theirs M14s, or something similar, but they are not actual M14s, only M14 pattern rifles, with semi auto receivers.

When Colt and Armscorp made AR-15's for sale prior to the 1986 FOPA, they sold them with "happy switches" as AR-15's.

They did not sell them as M16's. They were AR-15's.

The logic of AR-15 = semiauto, M16 = machine gun falls through.

Just like the logic of M14 = goobermint machine gun, M1A = commercial semiauto clone, also falls through.

Military "M" designations are used in military categorization. But they don't imply that the only "legitimate" object to hold that title is a military produced one. One merely need to examine non-firearms objects to confirm that. Lots of identical civilian sales of clothing, knives, tools and such, under either the different or the same name as the military. I have an M65 field jacket. Is it not an "M65" because it was never issued to a soldier?

What about the M9? I've seen Berettas marketed on the public market as model M9 and model 92, and they're both the same.

My reasoning for calling all M14/M1A pattern rifles "M14's" rather than something else, stems from my loathing of the Springfield trademark name "M1A." I see it misused and misunderstood by all sorts of people on this forum and elsewhere.

They see "M1A" and think it is an "M1" but with a box magazine instead of enbloc clips.

They mistakenly call it an "M1A1" and think it's like an M1 Carbine but with a bigger cartridge.

The "M1A" model monicker is an awful way to reference an M14 style rifle. The M14 is a legitimate design just like the M1 is distinctly different from it, or the 1911 is a distinct design, or the M9/Beretta 92 is a distinct design. All parts of an "M1A" are interchangeable with an M14 rifle. All the M14 clones (Fulton, SEI, Armscorp, LRB, SAI) have parts that are interchangeable with a military M14 rifle. Most of the military M14's had the happy switch stud cut off the receiver since it was deemed a "bad idea." The only M14's that don't have interchangeable parts are the Chinese Norinco and Polytechs, that use metric threading rather than standard. And even most of those parts (besides threaded parts like the barrel and gas chamber... for which metric replacements are available) are interchangeable.

I think the '86 FOPA created a distorted understanding of machine guns as "government only" and that the "M" designation is for "Machine Gun" rather than merely a category system for the military to denote models of approved equipment.

The M14 is a casualty of that thought process, and the "M1A" is a symptom of that distortion.

azredhawk44
October 22, 2010, 12:36 PM
azredhawk .... just wondering, but what is the difference between your Armscorp receiver, and mine?

Yours is marked as an M21, which were accurized M14's given to SDM's and snipers up through the 80's.

There's probably no receiver difference. Yours probably only has 2 lugs (rather than the 4 lug design that is a variation of the M14 design) just like an M14, accepts the same bolt and trigger group, and has the same barrel threading. One might hope that extra-special care was taken on the bolt engagement surfaces to keep them trued and to ideal dimension specs, but most of that tuning is done on the bolt rather than the receiver since the bolt is expected to have a shorter life than a receiver anyways.

It's just an M14 that gets treated better during construction than the typical infantry grade M14.

So, it's probably similar to my M14, as mine has been treated better during construction than the typical infantry grade M14.

Airborne Falcon
October 22, 2010, 01:57 PM
Thanks :) I did not know that. Much appreciated. :)

So my M21 ArmsCorp receiver is concerned a good make/model?

44 AMP
October 22, 2010, 08:08 PM
The maker can (other than copyrighted/trademarked names) call their product anything they want. The military does not trademark M# designations.

USGI M14s are select fire rifles, whether or not the select fire parts were installed when issed, they are legally machineguns.

I suppose it a matter of viewpoint, as you can legally call your civilian made semi auto an M14 if the maker does, but to me its an M14 pattern rifle, not a true (USGI) M14.

I also consider 1911s (and yes, I call them all that, for convienience) to be 1911 pattern guns. True 1911s (and 1911A1s) are those guns made for military service. Note that Colt never sold 1911s (and A1s) to the public. The gun they made and sold on the civilian market was called the "Government Model".

You can make a full auto AR, and call it an AR-15, you can call it an M16, if you mark it as such. But the actual M16 is the military weapon, and I view the others as M16 pattern guns. Yes, I'll call it what the maker calls it in conversation. But I also know the difference.

madcratebuilder
October 23, 2010, 09:07 AM
The OP's rifle is a typical early SA M1A with usgi parts, nothing unusual or special about it.

I suppose it a matter of viewpoint, as you can legally call your civilian made semi auto an M14 if the maker does, but to me its an M14 pattern rifle, not a true (USGI) M14.

Couldn't agree more. AR15's are not M16's and AR10's are only made by ArmaLite.

XD9GUY
October 23, 2010, 07:03 PM
Your Springfield M1A appears to have been built with all or almost all USGI parts. Your barrel has a Jan 1963 date on it, and the other No. is the USGI part # for a Chrome lined barrel. You can look these part #'s up on the M-14 Firing Line website. Judging by your serial # it was made prior to Mar 2002. My Springfield ser # is 140XXX and I wrote the Springfield Armory for the production date, they e-mailed me back and said it was Feb 2002.

You can e-mail Trisha at this e-mail address and she will send you back that info:

tkuster@springfield-armory.com