PDA

View Full Version : Is the M1A really worth it?


rantingrelentlessly
September 5, 2012, 09:23 AM
I really like autoladers. I currently have a Browning BAR in .300WM, a ruger 10/22, a Remington 1100 12 guage, a Mini14 and an AR15. I would really love to get an M1A but they seem to start at about $2000. Thats quite a bit more than any of my other guns. Is it really worth all that?

Slamfire
September 5, 2012, 09:31 AM
Ignoring the dollars, the civilian versions of the M14 are an outstanding rifle. For decades past it was the rifle you used at Camp Perry and it was, until recently the best 308 automatic on the market if you were looking for reliability, trigger, sights.

For years you could live off the military parts on the market, you did not have issues with parts not fitting because the civilian receivers were designed to use military parts. However, military parts dried up and are now expensive.

With the introduction of the AR10's parts are not necessarily interchangeable between manufacturers, (I don't know which are or are not), they have unique magazines, etc.

However the AR10's are proving to be more accurate as a target weapon than the M1a, but I don't know and don't believe they are more reliable in a combat environment than the M1a as that rifle went through a decade of development and was fielded.

As for price, they cost too much when I got mine and they have not gotten any cheaper.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1a%20and%20Garand%20Receiver%20Pictures/Selectorswitchsidefulllength.jpg

jason41987
September 5, 2012, 10:32 AM
when you see an AR10 being more accuruate, an FAL being the more expandable/adaptable platform, and the saiga .308 doing what the AK does best.. its hard to justify the sheer cost of the M1A which really doesnt do anything better than atleast one of these other rifles can do... and the moment you think about changing the stock, its $600+ for an inexpensively made injection moulded stock

SR420
September 5, 2012, 11:06 AM
The M14/M1A is a more expandable/adaptable platform than most people are aware of.
This is a result of the continuous use of the M14 by the US military since it was introduced.
The M14/M1A is a robust, reliable and accurate rifle, but it does require quality parts.

It's worth it if you have the money.

Woody55
September 5, 2012, 11:08 AM
I can't speak to the cost because I don't know if that is a lot of money to the OP or not.

However, the M1A is (or can be) a beautiful rifle, and it is a pleasure to shoot. In my opinion the down side is that it's kind of heavy for walking around.

FrosSsT
September 5, 2012, 12:59 PM
It was worth it to me. You get what you pay for, and the M1A is a perfect example of that. Try shopping around for a used one if you want to get the cost under 1400

RampantAndroid
September 5, 2012, 05:53 PM
The M1A is worth it by FAR. The AR10 is expensive, usually. A match grade M1A isn't that much from Springfield. Ignore Fulton's M1As. If you want to spend more on an M1A, get an LRB or Smith one.

I have my M1A in a EBR stock with a Leupold 3.5-10x scope. I love the thing, it rocks.

Edward429451
September 5, 2012, 06:17 PM
I hesitate to say that it is worth 2K because they'll prolly read this and raise the prices. It is a fine rifle though and I look good everytime I break it out.

It is heavy but I carried it hunting one year. I shut off the gas valve and loaded it with 180 gr handloads, using it like a straight pull bolt action. I have a SA Loaded model and have no regrets buying it. (Took out a personal loan to buy it!)

It's worth it. Buy it. My only regret is not getting the wood stock. I thought the EBR stock would be lighter but it turns out it's only a few ounces lighter, so go wood.

Shotgun693
September 5, 2012, 06:19 PM
I used to sell the M1A from Springfield. They are really nice and very serviceable out of the box. I had a HK 91 that had been modified into a sniper rifle. I liked the HK but it wasn't nearly stock. If I were looking right now I'd get another HK and put a'bunch more money into it. BTW, don't use commercial hunting ammo in your M1A.

hodaka
September 5, 2012, 06:23 PM
You will probably always get your money back. Think resale.

Michael
September 5, 2012, 06:34 PM
the M1A platform in match or M21 configuration is far more accurate than most people realize. It just takes a skilled operator to really make it sing.

Hodaka, you must be old people. I had a Super Rat.

hodaka
September 5, 2012, 07:29 PM
Me too. Best bike names ever.

Palmetto-Pride
September 5, 2012, 07:42 PM
I think it depends on what your primary use for it will be. If its to put rounds down range with your POI as close as it can be to your POA efficiently then IMO there are better options like the AR-10, but if there is a nostalgic value to you its hard to put that into $$$.

SR420
September 5, 2012, 08:10 PM
.



Why is it that the AR-10 has no nostalgic value?

It's been around as long as the M14 and the M14 can be just as accurate as the best AR-10






.

Palmetto-Pride
September 5, 2012, 08:30 PM
Why is it that the AR-10 has no nostalgic value?

IMO because it was never used as a primary weapon in any US war. Although yes it has been around about just as long as the M-14 the US never adopted it.

It's been around as long as the M14 and the M14 can be just as accurate as the best AR-10

The key words you used are CAN BE just as accurate, for less money the AR-10 can be more accurate. The key word I used is efficiently:)

dontcatchmany
September 5, 2012, 09:20 PM
I got a M14 for free back in 1968....actually had use of several prior to that too.

And that M14 probably is the reason I am here today....had something to do with some folks in pajamas trying to get rid of me and my buddies.:D Had to give it back in October 1969 and I was very glad to do so at the time.

But, that being said, I have wanted an M14 (Now the civilian M1A) very badly......my reason for not getting one already is not the cost which is a bit much for my retired budget, it is the fact that my shooting shoulder has been completely replaced and I do not think that I can stand the recoil.

If I knew that I could shoot it without a 25,000 buck medical bill, I would have one in a finstant.

kraigwy
September 5, 2012, 09:45 PM
I'm a competition shooter, high power. I've been shooting my M1A for about 35 years. It got my distinguished rifle badge.

Is it worth it? Heck yeah, for me it is.

Edward429451
September 5, 2012, 11:02 PM
BTW, don't use commercial hunting ammo in your M1A.

It's ok if you turn the gas valve off so that the op rod does not cycle at all. It only needs to be cycled manually, a straight pull repeater. It cycles faster manually than a bolt rifle, and they do sell 5 rnd mags.

It's not that heavy either, if ya hunt as slow as I do, lol.

SIGSHR
September 5, 2012, 11:17 PM
It is on my list of guns I will get "Someday" and having trained with it in BCT it occupies an important place in my psyche.

44 AMP
September 5, 2012, 11:51 PM
I got mine back when they were $500 for a rack grade gun. And $500 was a lot of money then! Completely stock, rack grade rifle, GI parts, even has the full auto cutout in the stock.

And, being I graduated second in the last class USAOC&S trained on the M14 rifle for MOS 45B20 (Small Arms Repairman) I have a certain...fondness.. for the M1A.

its not a black gun (although it could be with the black stock I have for it). ITs a rifle. Not optimised for close battle, or getting in and out of cramped armored vehicles. A rifle.

When used in regular semi auto mode, it should be fed GI ball, or equivalent pressure/velocity loads. In this, its like its parent, the Garand. And though the self regulating gas system makes it a little more tolerant, you should run it on what it was designed to use, or equivalent, not hotter commercial ammo.

My rifle has the old WWII style locking bar rear sight, and for the last 30 years while I could still see well, I could hit anything I could see out to about 600yds, without serious effort. Part of that is also due to my rifle having a sweet trigger. Two stage, but fairly light and very crisp for final let off. A joy to shoot.

I've also done a fair bit of shooting with 3 different AR-10 class rifles belonging to a friend. One of them even had 3 different generations of magazines. ALL of them had magazine issues with several individual 20 and 25 rnds mags tested. The 5 & 10s tested worked ok.

If you got to have an AR10 type, and you want it to work (they are all accuracte) get the one that uses FAL mags.

If you want a modular easily modded rifle, the M1A isn't the best for that. If you want the most you can get from the improved Garand design, that's the M1A.

Own or have owned, HK 91, FAL, SVT 40, Garand, AR, AK, and M1A. My personal favorite? M1A it just fits me, and works well.

Is it worth the cost? Personal decision. In dollar terms, it was to me, 30 years ago. Today? well, I just look at the $4 a gallon gas, and it doesn't seem all that much money. Personal opinion, I wouldn't pay that much for a match grade, because I can't get more from a match rifle than I already get from my "rack grade" on. If you can, it might be worth it, but not to me, anymore....;)

Keg
September 6, 2012, 03:19 AM
BTW, don't use commercial hunting ammo in your M1A.

It's ok if you turn the gas valve off so that the op rod does not cycle at all. It only needs to be cycled manually, a straight pull repeater. It cycles faster manually than a bolt rifle, and they do sell 5 rnd mags.


Why? Explain....I use hunting ammo in my Socom 16....I hog hunt with it....I have'nt had any issues....

akguy1985
September 6, 2012, 03:43 AM
They are worth it, however the street price is much lower than $2,000. More like around $1,300-$1,500.

madcratebuilder
September 6, 2012, 08:10 AM
I would really love to get an M1A but they seem to start at about $2000. Thats quite a bit more than any of my other guns. Is it really worth all that?

2K is match rifle price. I see loaded and standard models, used but like new, starting just over 1K. If you look around you can find a M1A with GI parts for around 1.5k.

You can have either wood and steel or the new modular stocks. I have a 1980 and a 1989 M1A, the early model went back to SAI for a bolt recall. No expense at my end. The SAI warranty is the best around.

Great shooters, like any larger center fire, they are not cheap to feed. Figure .50 a round for surplus and up to $2+ for match grade. Good round to reload.

Good shooters right from the box, the iron sights are among the best. It is spendy to add optics because of mount cost.

I shoot the M1A's and AR-10's more than any other rifle I own.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d37/madcratebuilder/2M1As.jpg

Edward429451
September 6, 2012, 08:30 AM
Why? Explain....I use hunting ammo in my Socom 16.

It's got to do with peak pressure and battering of the op rod. Bullets are supposed to be kept to 175 gr max, and not too slow of a powder. Commercial hunting ammo is loaded too hot for the M1A/Garand operating system. This disappointed me at first but then I realized duh shut off the gas and it can't hurt it.

Chuckusaret
September 6, 2012, 08:57 AM
Michael
Senior Member
Join Date: July 21, 1999
Location: Texas

Hodaka, you must be old people. I had a Super Rat.
__________________
b


Bought a M1A many years ago for $500 and recently sold it for $1K and now wish I had it back.

My son and i had many Hodakas, mostly Combat Wombat, it was our best motor cross bike racing out of El Paso until the Yamaha YZ125's and CZ's hit the market.

Shotgun693
September 6, 2012, 09:41 AM
When I was selling the M1A, the factory told me to tell every customer NOT to use commercial type ammo. They said that prolonged use would damage the gun. That was good enough for me.

RampantAndroid
September 6, 2012, 06:39 PM
It's got to do with peak pressure and battering of the op rod. Bullets are supposed to be kept to 175 gr max, and not too slow of a powder. Commercial hunting ammo is loaded too hot for the M1A/Garand operating system. This disappointed me at first but then I realized duh shut off the gas and it can't hurt it.

I don't hunt, but isn't a 168gr round enough? Regardless, you get a variable gas plug if you want more than 175gr. You're still shooting higher pressure rounds and not risking your oprod being bent.

geetarman
September 6, 2012, 07:07 PM
Yes!

I regret I waited so long to buy one. Great rifle.

Keg
September 6, 2012, 08:03 PM
It's got to do with peak pressure and battering of the op rod. Bullets are supposed to be kept to 175 gr max, and not too slow of a powder. Commercial hunting ammo is loaded too hot for the M1A/Garand operating system. This disappointed me at first but then I realized duh shut off the gas and it can't hurt it.

I guess I will test this theory....I bought to hunt hogs with....I use 180 grain Win power points....So far so good....No way I'm goin single shot....

Edward429451
September 6, 2012, 08:23 PM
168 grains is enough for most anything but I like Sierras 180 gr GKs and wanted to have the load in case I ever decided to hunt with it.

I guess I will test this theory....I bought to hunt hogs with....I use 180 grain Win power points....So far so good....No way I'm goin single shot....

Do you mean that you're going to try the Power Points without turning off the gas valve? That's a pretty expensive rifle to test what is an established fact. It wouldn't really be a single shot but would have to be cycled manually. It reloads fast manually, faster than a bolt.

I don't have plans to ever hunt any critters that bite back though. Just Deer & Elk at the most. If you damage your op rod, please don't get mad at me! I say turn it off if you run 180's. I'm aware of the variable plugs but I don't want to modify my rifle or spend money on it. But it is nice to know that I can shut it off and run 180s in a pinch. Easy to do with the rim of a cartridge and increases the potential versatility of the rifle overall.

44 AMP
September 6, 2012, 08:59 PM
Look at the specs for GI ammo. A 150gr @2750fps and a 173 @ 2640fps +/-30fps.

Commercial .308 hunting ammo is loaded nearly a couple hundred feet per second faster. While this doesn't instantly wreck the M1A, it does put a strain on the system.

What happens when you run a regular car on aviation fuel? Improved performance, for a while. Then repair bills.

The best solution for the rifle is for hunting ammo, use a good hunting bullet loaded to the velocity range/pressure curve the rifle was built for. I absolutely guarantee no animal will know the difference, and except for a slightly greater drop at long range (vs commercial .308 hunting ammo), neither will you.

Also, while I have not seen it, I have heard that some .308 SP RN bullets have been known to shave a little sliver of lead off the nose during the feeding cycle (when in the left hand side of the mag), and if enouogh lead builds up, it can cause the action to malfunction. Don't know if that's true, but why risk it?

Its the pressure curve of some hunting ammo that can give trouble in the M1A/Garand design. If the gas piston slams the op rod too "fast" the op rod can get bent. This is much more likely in the Garand, but possible in the M14/M1A as well.

And I don't mean bent enough to jam up the rifle (that would be extremely rare), just bent enough to affect the accuracy of the gun. Usually when it does get bent enough to do that, its not visible to the naked eye with a casual examination.

Of course, closing off the gas system avoids the possibility of this problem.

Keg
September 7, 2012, 03:44 AM
Look at the specs for GI ammo. A 150gr @2750fps and a 173 @ 2640fps +/-30fps

44 AMP..My gun is the SOCOM 16....I am already losing some velocity with the shorter barrel....I really don't wanna lose anymore....I have had the gun several years now...I started out using 150 gr Rem Corelocks...I came across a deal on a large amount of 180 gr Win power points..and started using them....I have only been to the range a couple times with this gun..the rest of the time I have only hunted with it....That is year round hunting tho....I have experienced no problems.....What would be the cost of a new op rod?

RampantAndroid
September 7, 2012, 03:54 AM
A new op rop is usually around $200 or so. Just get a schuster plug. As I understand it, you can fire normal 168gr rounds from the M1A with no issues.

Also, with my Sage EBR chassis, there's an op rod guide. I imagine that if the oprod gets bent, the gun will jam/no cycle correctly.

Justice06RR
September 7, 2012, 05:14 AM
It really depends if its worth it to you. Its a fine rifle no doubt; it just depends if you can afford the price tag or if you have a use for it -- given what rifles you already have and a what alternatives you have available in 7.62NATO/308. There are Rem700's, Saiga's, AR10's for less $, and FN Scar and others for a bit more.

I'm sure many folks will say the M1A is worth it, but only you can decide that. For me its not, because I have no use for it personally, and already own 2 other rifles in 7.62 ( a 300Blackout and 54R ).

Keg
September 7, 2012, 05:54 AM
Rampant..what is a schuster plug?

geetarman
September 7, 2012, 06:10 AM
Maybe KRAIGWY will chime in here.

I have been under the impression the M1 could be damaged by loading too hot but the M1A was good to go for any commercial .308 ammo.

I usually just shoot surplus military through mine but I am curious if there is a potential problem with using the wrong ammo.

I handload a lot of 168/175 gr bullets for the bolt gun and have been tempted to try them in the M1A.

None of my handloads are top of the charts fast.

Am I missing something?

Logs
September 7, 2012, 06:19 AM
Looks for one used for around $1200 and yes they are worth it. I have tried FAL's and .308 AR's and like the M1A the best.

madcratebuilder
September 7, 2012, 06:50 AM
From the M1A owners manual.

The M1A is designed and built to specifications to shoot standard factory military 7.62 NATO ammunition.

Use only recently made high quality, original military or factory-manufactured ammunition of 7.62 caliber.

The heaviest 7.62 round I have seen is in the 168/175 gr range. I shoot both 157 surplus and 168/175 match ammo in both of my rifles. I'm not seeing any unusual wear. As I recall SAI tech support well tell you .308 up to 180gr is safe, but watch for slam fires with any .308 because of soft primers.

three-fifty-seven
September 7, 2012, 11:09 AM
I don't think they are worth it as Norinco M305s are a lot cheaper and made with better materials.

Now before anyone chews me out for my comment I am just restating what my instructor told me on my M14 clinic.

http://www.m14hungry.com/

SR420
September 7, 2012, 11:29 AM
three-fifty-seven I don't think they are worth it as Norinco M305s are a lot cheaper and made with better materials.

Norinco and Poly Tech M14s haven't been imported into the US for about 20 years now.
The cheap Norinco M305s are not available to M14 enthusiasts here in these United States.
Priced at around $1000.00 for a used Norc or Poly, these are a better value than new Springer M1As.

kraigwy
September 7, 2012, 11:53 AM
The M14/M1A was designed to shoot mil ball or match, meaning they were loaded with 150 to 173/175 bullets with medium burning powder.

Kind of like timing, medium burning powder burns to a point then bleeds off the gas into the gas system. A certain amount of pressure is needed to work the action, or eject one round and load another.

Any more then that, or what you would get from the slower burning powder, heavier bullets or both. It adds no benefit to the gun or its accuracy (actually you'll find accuracy suffers).

These guns aren't cheap, nor is the gas system/op rod. Why risk it. What can you do with a 308 180 grn @ 2800 fps hunting round that you can't do with a 165 grn hunting bullet going 2600 fps?

Nothing, chances are both are gonna pass threw the critter so its wasted energy.


You can buy a good bolt hunting rifle for what is going to cost you to replace the gas system of a M1A.

There are reloading guides for loading the M1A/M14 and there are factory hunting ammo (hornady & black hills to name a couple).

One more thing about the standard loadings for the M1A/M14, using the flash suppressor for that rifle. Take it out at night and shoot it. You'll find there is no detectable muzzle flash.

Its your gun, do what you want. I got my M1A in 1977, shot the heck out of it and the only thing I've had to replace is a couple shot out barrels and stretched out slings.

MJ1
September 7, 2012, 12:00 PM
I have been shooting the a while and enjoyed most of the time but the first few years of the 45 years I have used them.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/54f9a34e.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/ec273e78.jpg

$2K where did you get that number?

Cheers
..MJ..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/7b180e23.jpg

Shotgun693
September 7, 2012, 01:23 PM
The M1A is not hard to reload for. Small base dies seem to work best. I reloaded for my HK even though the fluted chamber made the brass look like it had gone though a garbage disposal. You could even pull bullets from a military round and replace it with a hunting type bullet. A 150 gr bullet at 2750 will kill any Deer in North America, in fact except for maybe a Brown Bear or Polar Bear I can't think of anything I couldn't reliably kill with it.

RampantAndroid
September 7, 2012, 01:38 PM
Rampant..what is a schuster plug?

They make it for the garand and the M1A. It's a variable gas plug that allows you to determine how much gas is used to push the op rod back. When loosened, it lets gas exit the gas piston, slowing the op rod down. Loosened too much, the gun won't cycle correctly. You tune the plug to a specific type ammo, ensuring that only JUST enough gas remains in the gas piston. This setup is NEEDED to fire anything other than old surplus or new manufacture garand specific ammo. it's not needed as much in the m1a, but it exists.

Chard
September 11, 2012, 09:29 AM
My neck of the woods they run $1200 to $1400 for a nice used safequeen. Earlier on bring more. The early SA M1a's were built with a lot of USGI parts.
LRB M14 built from USGI H&R parts
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/GLG20/fa4e4a2c.jpg

1990 SA M1a, TRW trigger group, bolt, op rod with a SAK barrel
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/GLG20/M1A624XX.jpg

sixplus1
September 11, 2012, 11:25 AM
Some people are single shot hunters, and some are shooters. The M1a is most suitable for shooters.

Get your hands on one and see if you have an emotional response to it.

My M1a Loaded is more accurate than I am. I am not a match shooter, just a shooter. Some folks talk about making 600 yard shots, I am thrilled to put them on a 300 Yard target with iron sights. My expensive scope has been getting lonely lately.

Milsurp ammo comes and goes .... to me. I have plenty and average about 60 rounds per range trip. Sometimes it is fun to just rip off a handful of rounds at an imaginary zombie.

There are maintenance issues.... the SAI ejector is not so good, replace the entire bolt guts with GI stuff. The op rod spring should be a minimum 15 inches long.

This rifle is really fun to shoot, really fun.

MJ1
September 11, 2012, 11:56 AM
Recycle @ 2600 fps.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/e046d194.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/32c80cfe.jpg

theinvisibleheart
September 11, 2012, 12:21 PM
not at $2,000.

OK b/w $1,000-$1,200(used?) IMHO.

It's very close to CMP Garand in 30-06 which be had directly from CMP for $600 or less, depending on grade.

geetarman
September 11, 2012, 12:22 PM
My M1a Loaded is more accurate than I am. I am not a match shooter, just a shooter. Some folks talk about making 600 yard shots, I am thrilled to put them on a 300 Yard target with iron sights. My expensive scope has been getting lonely lately.


There 'ya go. I have a loaded M1A and mine has the VLTOR rail system.

I put a Nikon Monarch 4-14 X50 on it with Warne rings.

The gun shot fine but I have since taken the scope off and shoot only iron sights.

The added benefit is, I put a picatinny rail on my CZ452 and guess what scope that rifle has now?

That rifle ( The CZ 452 ) shoots quarter size groups of 10 at 100 yards in the rain. . .and I can still take that scope off and put it back on the M1A and rezero with a bore sighter and get it back on paper.

Gotta love it.

kraigwy
September 11, 2012, 12:42 PM
The best scores I ever fired in a 1000 yard match was at 29 Palms.

I shot my Model 70 300 WM in the any rifle any sight match, and the any rifle iron sight match.

I shot my M1A in the Service rifle match and beat the scores I fired with the 300 WM.

I've shot a heck of a lot of 1000 yard matches in the last 35 years, and my M1A has always out preformed any other rifle I used.

That is with iron sights.

SR420
September 11, 2012, 12:46 PM
As for the Schuster gas plug for the M14/M1A, I shoot 147gr NATO surplus
all the way up to 175gr M118LR with and without my sound suppressor and
I push 180gr sub sonic projectiles through the suppressor WITHOUT the
Schuster gas plug. Thousand of rounds fired from 16.25, 18.0 and 22.0
inch M14 barrels without a single problem... :)

RampantAndroid
September 11, 2012, 02:12 PM
Chard - is the LRB M1A worth more than a stock M1A from Springfield? Would you recommend putting one in a SAGE EBR stock?

SR420
September 11, 2012, 02:24 PM
:) I can't speak for Chard, but I would choose the LRB
over the M1A no matter what stock you plan to put it in.

RampantAndroid
September 11, 2012, 03:38 PM
Sure, but given I have the SA M1A in a Sage stock now, what would an LRB offer over what I already have? A stronger forged receiver sure, but more than that?

MJ1
September 13, 2012, 04:56 PM
'83 goodness,,,
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/414f926c.jpg

..MJ..

SR420
September 13, 2012, 07:56 PM
RampantAndroid, if your M1A currently runs smoothly and shoots accurately putting in the SAGE EBR chassis I would leave it alone.

I like the LRB rifles over new production M1As because the LRB stands a much better chance of being assembled with greater care and with better quality parts. I do not recommend replacing a smooth running M1A with an LRB just because it has a forged receiver.

Does any of that help?


BTW, Norinco and Poly Tech receivers are drop forged.



.

nicknitro71
September 14, 2012, 07:28 AM
The original M14 receivers were dropped forged meaning a block of forged steel is heated up and then a die dropped over it with very high force. With this method the receiver is born that way making very, very strong but it's cost prohibited unless you got a big military contract justifying it. This is the only method assuring enough strength for full auto operation.

NONE of the commercially available receivers are built this way or you'll be paying a good 5K for the rifle.

Most receivers nowadays are milled from forged steel which is strong enough for civilian semi-auto-only.

Casting means pouring melted metal into a mold which by far produces the weakest of all receives as they are brittle by nature with a lot of air gaps in the material.

As for the rear lug, the mil M14 did not have one but it was stronger; there is a lot of speculation about its efficacy but it does ensure a proper torquing of the receiver into the stock thanks to the set bolt. Keep in mind that there were instances when a rifle dropped on the stock rest could result in the break of the rear lug.

The M14 was by far my favorite assault rifle in the service; I've never cared for the M16/AR15/AR10.

As if the M1A is worth it, I'd buy a basic model and tweak it from there but dropping 3K+ on it, I just don't see it but I sure would love my M14 back!

MJ1
September 14, 2012, 11:51 AM
$3K? I still don't see where your getting these numbers?

$1,800 new.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/fcbd7636.jpg

RampantAndroid
September 14, 2012, 03:18 PM
MJ1, who made that one? Where's the stock from?

10mmAuto
September 15, 2012, 12:12 PM
You'll spend more money on an M1A for any given performance level than more modern autoloading .308s.

SR420
September 15, 2012, 12:29 PM
... any given performance level than more modern autoloading .308s

What are these more modern auto-loading .308s you speak of and how much do they sell for?

http://www.athenswater.com/images/M21A5-light.jpg


.

10mmAuto
September 15, 2012, 02:28 PM
What are these more modern auto-loading .308s you speak of and how much do they sell for?
FNAR, AR-10, Scar 17. They'll all outperform the M1As in their price categories pretty handily and give you less muzzle climb to boot due to a much softer/smoother felt free recoil - less muzzle climb and less to jar you off your look down the scope.

I have an $1,100 FNAR HBAR that hovers around the .5MOA mark with a very soft recoil impulse, that's well above the average performance level of an entry price M1A which is a full 500ish dollars higher. I've seen a fair amount of examples in the type and they're all sub-MOA guns. FNH's reps advertise it as a one minute gun. To be confident of that level of accuracy in an M1A, I'd have to drop about twice the cash and the recoil would be poor in comparison. If we wanted to talk M1A compared to the AR-10 or Scar, the list of advantages go on a lot longer than just better accuracy and recoil.

There's a reason the M14s in inventory were only an interim solution to the need for a semi-automatic 7.62x51mm and were phased out, in Military acquisitions time (slow), pretty rapidly in favor of the SR-25, its knockoffs and the Scar.

If you just want to plink, the M1A is a fine choice, but if you want performance or bang for the buck it's not the go to choice in the year 2012.

SR420
September 15, 2012, 04:03 PM
The AR-10 is just as 'modern' as the M14... it's been around since 1955 or so. The so called 'interim solution' continues because the modernized M14 has proven itself much more reliable than the AR-10s in battlefield conditions. The modernized TACOM M14EBR-RI is known for it's 1 MOA accuracy and SEI M14s are known for their sub MOA accuracy. The AR-10 may be a good choice for target shooting at your local range, but it's probably not such a great choice for battlefield use - too bad politics and marketing supersede common sense.

That said, the Springfield M1A is no M14 and it may very well require some tweaking, GI or SEI parts to perform as well as what the military is currently using, but it's well worth the investment for 2012 and beyond.

I'm sure the civilian FNAR and SCAR-17 are great rifles, but neither have inspired me to replace any of my modernized M14s.

10mmAuto
September 15, 2012, 05:41 PM
The AR-10 is just as 'modern' as the M14... it's been around since 1955 or so.

Current AR-10s are heterogeneous and actually derived from upscaled versions of modern AR-15s, and wouldn't have any level of parts interchangeability with the AR-10 that competed against the M14 back in the day.

What you're saying isn't dissimilar to saying my Jeep Grand Cherokee isn't any more modern than a model T, because the mass produced automobile dates back to that point. Stoner's rifle has gone through massive refinement with almost endless private sector permutations - the M14 is still pretty much the M14.


The so called 'interim solution' continues

No, it doesn't, the M110 and Scar 17 were both adopted to phase it out. The only place you'll sometimes see M14s is for personnel that those items aren't high priority for, like designated marksmen. The last time I saw a 14 in military service in person was in the hands of a Guard Cav Scout in 2008.


because the modernized M14 has proven itself much more reliable than the AR-10s in battlefield conditions.
No, if you think otherwise prove it, that's a fairly bold statement.

The modernized TACOM M14EBR-RI is known for it's 1 MOA accuracy and SEI M14s are known for their sub MOA accuracy.

If so, what's the price point like for a consumer commercial or military? What's the weight and modularity like? How soft is the recoil - that is an extremely big consideration for a semi automatic precision rifle in a full power rifle round"


The AR-10 may be a good choice for target shooting at your local range, but it's probably not such a great choice for battlefield use - too bad politics and marketing supersede common sense.

SEAL, CAG, Ranger and the USMC all adopted the SR-25 independent of one another before the M110 came around. Say what you want about the USMC - JSOC, USASOC and NAVSOC units aren't exactly under a lot of political pressure to use a Stoner over a Garand design.

That said, the Springfield M1A is no M14 and it may very well require some tweaking, GI or SEI parts to perform as well as what the military is currently using, but it's well worth the investment for 2012 and beyond.

To you, obviously so. To someone who doesn't have an emotional investment in a particular design pattern, there's lower recoiling, cheaper, lighter and more accurate options

I'm sure the civilian FNAR and SCAR-17 are great rifles, but neither have inspired me to replace any of my modernized M14s.

Again, to you obviously not, but a lot of organizations that assess based on weapon performance, value operator input highly and with massive financial means - so obviously that was not the reason they went for/against one type - felt otherwise.


Sorry, I am not trying to go fifth grade English teacher style with a red pen here, but most of what you said was misleading or incorrect. Obviously, you have an emotional attachment to the weapon type, but the fact is now it's inferior in terms of all major considerations - especially to the Scar.

I think you're reacting with some hostility to my assertions because of said emotional attachment - I'm not telling you it's a bad weapon, I'm telling you it's not at the top of the pile anymore and it's a bad choice for a price: performance ratio interested consumer.

SR420
September 15, 2012, 07:33 PM
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s720x720/485828_467183186632208_321184092_n.jpg

No, you boldly gloss over the proven reliability of the modernized M14 in combat when compared to the less than reliable performance of the AR-10 variant in combat.

No, the TACOM M14EBR-RI is priced thousands less than the M110, the weight of the two is comparable.

Obviously, you have emotional attachments to the other weapon types especially the SCAR, but this fact doesn't magically make the modernized M14/M1A an option unworthy of consideration.

One must consider the available support for the rifle they choose and the M14/M1A has much more support on the civilian supply side than any of the others you are championing here today.


.

MJ1
September 15, 2012, 07:35 PM
SCAR runs $2700 + and you get one magazine and extras are $125~$150+ IF you can find them.. Oh let me jump on that. SCAR butt-stocks are breaking left and right and the M1A1/M15 has a life time warranty and good service team should you need it. Now who is emotionally attached? How much combat time do you have with the SCAR? I have plenty with mud rain and thousands of rounds with the M14. I would like a SCAR for a fun gun if I win the lotto and had $3K but going into harms way with it isn't my first pick.

Cheers
..MJ..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/b4251fd8.jpg

10mmAuto
September 15, 2012, 11:26 PM
A 5th grade English teacher would chew you up and spit you out.

You should reconsider being so rude just because someone disagrees with you about firearms. I feel pretty confident you wouldn't have the chutzpah to do it face to face to me, try not to do it online either.

As a side note, your insult was nonsensical.



No, you boldly gloss over the proven reliability of the modernized M14 in combat when compared to the less than reliable performance of the AR-10 variant in combat.

No, I invited you to prove it with some metrics. MRBS, etc. You did not.

No, the TACOM M14EBR-RI is priced thousands less than the M110, the weight of the two is comparable.

Unfortunately for you, we weren't comparing the merits of the M110 to the M1A. I said AR-10s are superior to the M1A, and just mentioned the M110/SR-25 as an example of how the Stoner design has superseded the M14 derivatives amongst informed consumers (the military). As a side note, an SR-25 can be had for the same price as a "vanilla" EBR and will outperform it in terms of accuracy and has a more favorable weight distribution, softer recoil impulse, etc. So will a $1,500 Armalite.

As a side note, I've toted both and the weight is comparable but the weight distribution isn't. The weight distribution of the Scar and M110 make them much more comfortable to carry than a tricked out M14EBR


Obviously, you have emotional attachments to the other weapon types especially the SCAR, but this fact doesn't magically make the modernized M14/M1A an option unworthy of consideration.

No, I backed it that assertion with some commonly understood facts. The explanation you have for me thinking there are better alternatives to the M1A is that I have an emotional attachment to The Scar, FNAR, and all AR-10 type rifles - but for some reason not the M1A? Does that make sense to you when you read it? That is a very weak argument.

On the other hand, you have a giant Facebook shrine to the M1A and irrationally dismissed the armed forces as misinformed and driven by politics for phasing out M14s - even though practically every branch and SOF made independent and apolitical decisions to do so.



One must consider the available support for the rifle they choose and the M14/M1A has much more support on the civilian supply side than any of the others you are championing here today.

Since when? There are tons of AR-10s at every gun store and more manufacturers of AR-10s than M1A. It's been that way for a few years now. M1As are by far less common.




SCAR runs $2700 + and you get one magazine and extras are $125~$150+ IF you can find them

Yeah, and if you read my original post I said the designs I stated would perform the M1A at any given dollar value. As in, 1,100 dollar FNARs and (no M1As at this price, but will none the less outperform them all in terms of accuracy and recoil mitigation) and 1,500 dollar AR-10s will outperform 1,500 dollar M1As (I'll extend that to all M1As as well), and 2,700 dollar Scar 17 will blow a 2,700 dollar M1A away.

As a side note, the magazines are 40 dollars, I just looked it up now because I had a sinking suspicion your figures were incorrect. The confidence interval you created for their price starts at over 300% of 40. I'm skeptical of the objectivity of anyone who lies blatantly to inflate the power of their argument


.. Oh let me jump on that. SCAR butt-stocks are breaking left and right

And Glocks KB all over the place, and M4 receiver extensions break all the time, because there are pictures on the internet right?

and the M1A1/M15 has a life time warranty and good service team should you need it. Now who is emotionally attached?
For an emotionally attached guy, I sure did mention a lot of weapons that are better than the M1A for a consumer for the money.

How much combat time do you have with the SCAR? I have plenty with mud rain and thousands of rounds with the M14.
Do you? If you're a Vietnam Veteran, I respect your service - I really do, but it's not informative to a discussion on which weapon system is better in 2012. The state of the art in the firearm world now is no longer where it was in 1964.

I would like a SCAR for a fun gun if I win the lotto and had $3K but going into harms way with it isn't my first pick.

Cool story, USSOCOM felt differently. The US Army, Marine Corp and Navy Seals also all felt like KAC AR-10s were better than their M14s. I think the operators at USSOCOM, JSOC, NAVSOC, etc are more informed than you or I and all of them no longer use M14s



If you think you have more to add, PM me. I feel like it's pretty obvious both of you fell into the common trap of feeling personally insulted because somebody doesn't think your gear is the best, based on all the pictures of M1As you both have and said Facebook shrine of SR420. Maybe I could have used more subtle language to avoid that, but probably not.

SR420
September 16, 2012, 07:22 AM
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/574844_524048010945725_774524203_n.jpg

Brian Pfleuger
September 16, 2012, 08:10 AM
I think whatever needs to be said has been said.