M1A loaded vs Socom 2

JerryHN · November 14, 2010, 11:06 PM

I you could only get one, which would you pick? M1A loaded or M1A Socom 2? I like the loaded for its longer barrel length, but why did the Socom 2 win "Rifle of the Year 2005?"

Which one do you think is more durable/reliable?

Gulland · November 14, 2010, 11:52 PM

They are the same gun except for barrel length. Maybe things are a bit different due to that fact in the reliability department, but they are essentially the same machine.

It comes down to the question of whether or not you want a shorter barrel or not.

You wil sacrifice a bit of velocity, sight radius and (I believe) poorer balance for quicker handling gun that is a bit louder.

Rifle of the Year? Does anyone consider the possibility that Springfield's advertising budget had anything to do with the "Rifle of the Year" status? Who voted for it? They didn't ask me. Did you vote for the SOCOM? Didn't think so.

THORN74 · November 15, 2010, 12:00 AM

i picked the scout .... its 18 barrel gives u the best of both worlds .... longer barrel than the socom for better accuracy and more velocity, and it shorter than the NM for ease of carry and use for CQB if nessicarry

10mmAuto · November 15, 2010, 12:25 AM

Unless you're clearing rooms or doing all close range work I'd say the loaded.

I ****ing love handy carbines until it comes to really put the lead downrange, there's always compromise, the question is which end do you want to fall out on.

pythagorean · November 15, 2010, 06:14 AM

I love rifles over shotguns and handguns. I guess I am mostly a "rifle" guy.

I am rather conventional wanting blued steel and walnut.

I've got a love affair with the M1-A rifles on par with the M4s and AR 15s despite my preference for wood and blued steel. I've found the "assault rifles" available to the civilian world to be profoundly superior to all "hunting" and "conventional" rifles in wear and tear, reliability, portability, and accuracy.

So I have an M4 and an M1-A and M1 Carbine and Thompson 1927 A1 alongside my bolts and levers.

I've had numerous "loaded" M1 As over the past 20 years.

My preference between the shorter M1 As (Scout, Socom 16) and the standard M1 As materialized when I bought a SOCOM 16 for the first time. I never had any plans to own such a thing, but when the clerk showed me one and I shouldered it I found it to be "dynamic" to the balance. The sights came up clear and crisp. It was fast fast fast to shoulder and aim. It felt extremely close to the "balance" of "the best rifle" I have ever shouldered.

I went ahead and dropped all that money down on it, went to the range and found the thing to be extremely extremely pleasurable to shoot. With the open sights I found it to be as accurate as the longer barreled version (loaded packaged ones).

I also discovered it to be totally reliable. There is no appreciable velocity loss or power loss when compared to a longer barrel (16" v 22") considering how much shorter it is and what the cartridge is used for.

The gas chamber at the muzzle in conjunction with the 6 rifling twist (instead of 4) achieves the same results at most shooting ranges, and if you need to shoot a bullet over 400 yards with more velocity then why not just get a .300 Win Mag and forget the .308.

The Socom 16 I have is my only M1 A rifle today after 20 years of needing the M1 A style rifle in my collection.

You will get many responses about ballistic charts and muzzle blast and aversions to "short barrels" but today the long barrel is mostly added length and weight that takes away from the perfect battle rifle.

The SOCOM 16 to me is the most superior "battle rifle" available to date.

If one would rather have the 5.56 instead of a .30 cal then the M4 is the best pick.

It is the same length as the legendary M1 Carbine but packs more punch:

SR420 · November 15, 2010, 09:52 AM

Bush, Scout or MK14.

JerryHN · November 16, 2010, 12:16 AM

Wow, such a hard choice. Seems like a toss up between the loaded, scout and socom versions.

Here's a few questions: the loaded model has more "match" upgrades. What does this mean? Does it make the rifle more durable/reliable?

If I spend this much money on a rifle, I want it to last as long as possible; so ruggedness and durability are at the top of my priority.

Thanks for all the great info guys!

10mmAuto · November 16, 2010, 01:14 AM

If you're serious about getting a semi auto .308 I'd get an FNAR or one of the many high end AR-10s out there (LMT, Noveske). The M1A is a great gun but you pay a lot for the "Its an M14!!!" premium.
Frago - Noveske no longer makes AR-10s apparently.

pythagorean · November 16, 2010, 07:29 AM

There is no more rugged, dependable rifle in my experience. The SOCOM 16 is the most rugged rifle I've ever owned period.

November 14, 2010, 11:06 PM	#1
JerryHN Senior Member Join Date: October 31, 2010 Posts: 124	M1A loaded vs Socom 2 I you could only get one, which would you pick? M1A loaded or M1A Socom 2? I like the loaded for its longer barrel length, but why did the Socom 2 win "Rifle of the Year 2005?" Which one do you think is more durable/reliable?

November 15, 2010, 12:00 AM	#3
THORN74 Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2010 Location: Chicago 'Burbs Posts: 543	i picked the scout .... its 18 barrel gives u the best of both worlds .... longer barrel than the socom for better accuracy and more velocity, and it shorter than the NM for ease of carry and use for CQB if nessicarry __________________ Sig P226 .40s&w/9mm -- Kimber Pro CDP .45ACP -- Radom P64 9X18mm Makarov -- Dan Wesson RZ-45 Heritage .45ACP -- Ruger SR22 .22LR -- M&P9c 9mm Springfield Armory Inc. M1A Scout 7.62X51mm NATO -- Kar 98AZ (1917 Erfurt) 8mm Mauser -- Marlin Model 60 Glenfield .22LR -- Marlin 795 .22LR -- Marlin 915y .22LR -- AR15 5.56x45mm NATO -- Springfield Armory M1 Garand 30-06

November 15, 2010, 09:52 AM	#6
SR420 Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 3,336	Bush, Scout or MK14. __________________ The History and Development of the M14 EBR

November 14, 2010, 11:52 PM	#2
Gulland Member Join Date: January 18, 2008 Location: Southern Wisconsin Posts: 25	They are the same gun except for barrel length. Maybe things are a bit different due to that fact in the reliability department, but they are essentially the same machine. It comes down to the question of whether or not you want a shorter barrel or not. You wil sacrifice a bit of velocity, sight radius and (I believe) poorer balance for quicker handling gun that is a bit louder. Rifle of the Year? Does anyone consider the possibility that Springfield's advertising budget had anything to do with the "Rifle of the Year" status? Who voted for it? They didn't ask me. Did you vote for the SOCOM? Didn't think so.

November 15, 2010, 12:25 AM	#4
10mmAuto Senior Member Join Date: October 13, 2010 Posts: 598	Unless you're clearing rooms or doing all close range work I'd say the loaded. I ****ing love handy carbines until it comes to really put the lead downrange, there's always compromise, the question is which end do you want to fall out on.

November 15, 2010, 06:14 AM	#5
pythagorean Junior member Join Date: January 27, 2008 Posts: 970	I love rifles over shotguns and handguns. I guess I am mostly a "rifle" guy. I am rather conventional wanting blued steel and walnut. I've got a love affair with the M1-A rifles on par with the M4s and AR 15s despite my preference for wood and blued steel. I've found the "assault rifles" available to the civilian world to be profoundly superior to all "hunting" and "conventional" rifles in wear and tear, reliability, portability, and accuracy. So I have an M4 and an M1-A and M1 Carbine and Thompson 1927 A1 alongside my bolts and levers. I've had numerous "loaded" M1 As over the past 20 years. My preference between the shorter M1 As (Scout, Socom 16) and the standard M1 As materialized when I bought a SOCOM 16 for the first time. I never had any plans to own such a thing, but when the clerk showed me one and I shouldered it I found it to be "dynamic" to the balance. The sights came up clear and crisp. It was fast fast fast to shoulder and aim. It felt extremely close to the "balance" of "the best rifle" I have ever shouldered. I went ahead and dropped all that money down on it, went to the range and found the thing to be extremely extremely pleasurable to shoot. With the open sights I found it to be as accurate as the longer barreled version (loaded packaged ones). I also discovered it to be totally reliable. There is no appreciable velocity loss or power loss when compared to a longer barrel (16" v 22") considering how much shorter it is and what the cartridge is used for. The gas chamber at the muzzle in conjunction with the 6 rifling twist (instead of 4) achieves the same results at most shooting ranges, and if you need to shoot a bullet over 400 yards with more velocity then why not just get a .300 Win Mag and forget the .308. The Socom 16 I have is my only M1 A rifle today after 20 years of needing the M1 A style rifle in my collection. You will get many responses about ballistic charts and muzzle blast and aversions to "short barrels" but today the long barrel is mostly added length and weight that takes away from the perfect battle rifle. The SOCOM 16 to me is the most superior "battle rifle" available to date. If one would rather have the 5.56 instead of a .30 cal then the M4 is the best pick. It is the same length as the legendary M1 Carbine but packs more punch:

November 16, 2010, 12:16 AM	#7
JerryHN Senior Member Join Date: October 31, 2010 Posts: 124	Wow, such a hard choice. Seems like a toss up between the loaded, scout and socom versions. Here's a few questions: the loaded model has more "match" upgrades. What does this mean? Does it make the rifle more durable/reliable? If I spend this much money on a rifle, I want it to last as long as possible; so ruggedness and durability are at the top of my priority. Thanks for all the great info guys!

November 16, 2010, 01:14 AM	#8
10mmAuto Senior Member Join Date: October 13, 2010 Posts: 598	If you're serious about getting a semi auto .308 I'd get an FNAR or one of the many high end AR-10s out there (LMT, Noveske). The M1A is a great gun but you pay a lot for the "Its an M14!!!" premium. Frago - Noveske no longer makes AR-10s apparently.

November 16, 2010, 07:29 AM	#9
pythagorean Junior member Join Date: January 27, 2008 Posts: 970	There is no more rugged, dependable rifle in my experience. The SOCOM 16 is the most rugged rifle I've ever owned period.