M1A Rifle Questions

[tabby]

So i'm in the market for an M1A, and overall I've heard good things about them, also being in the military I've had a chance to
hold and shoot them.

So now that I'm out for the civilian market for one, what's a good price for a Springfield M1A standard?
I've seen them range from 1k-3k for a standard.. obviously there are weapon owners who's prices are a little... high.

Had a buddy of mine who also owns a Norinco M1A, I haven't heard anything too bad about them.. but chinese made rifles always put me off into the uncomfortable section, what's this forum's idea on them?

Also, I'm relatively new to shooting distance, I've been shooting obviously 300m-500m, and on my own personal time I've shot
500m, but want to start shooting a bit further, with the help of a glass. Anything decent priced 200-300 for 600m-700m distances?

Thanks everyone's information.

 

[tomcatfan]

I just picked up a standard Sprinfield Armory M1A from Gunbroker. I paid around $1300 for mine to give you an idea of how much they go for. It came with the standard black synthetic stock. Luckily I have a friend that knows a lot about the M14 platform. I was primarily picking up the rifle to fill a void in my collection before the "assault weapon" ban takes effect in MD.

Before I put any rounds through it I shimed the gas system and put it in a mil-spec Birch stock. First time I took it out I was shooting 1.5 MOA at 100 yds with some quick ammo I through together with Varget and 168gr SMK's. That was way better than I expected it, or me for that matter to shoot it. I'm typically an optics guy.

 

[tabby]

I just picked up a standard Sprinfield Armory M1A from Gunbroker. I paid around $1300 for mine to give you an idea of how much they go for. It came with the standard black synthetic stock. Luckily I have a friend that knows a lot about the M14 platform. I was primarily picking up the rifle to fill a void in my collection before the "assault weapon" ban takes effect in MD.

Before I put any rounds through it I shimed the gas system and put it in a mil-spec Birch stock. First time I took it out I was shooting 1.5 MOA at 100 yds with some quick ammo I through together with Varget and 168gr SMK's. That was way better than I expected it, or me for that matter to shoot it. I'm typically an optics guy.

Thanks tomcatfan, that's awesome man, and $1300 huh? Yeah, can't seem to find em for anything less than 1500 right now for local dealers, haven't dealt with Gunbroker yet... so I'm thinking about it heavily.

As for the accuracy, yes I've heard about shimming the gas system. Personally I like the synthetic stock, I'd probably throw a cheek riser, and add a bi-pod swivel. 1.5MOA is good, my AR-15 shoots about that, but obviously smaller faster round of the 5.56...
Yeah I'm stuck on committing and making sure I get an optic worth it. I have friends who say just throw an ACOG on it and call it good.

 

[BCP]

So i'm in the market for an M1A, and overall I've heard good things about them, also being in the military I've had a chance to
hold and shoot them.

So now that I'm out for the civilian market for one, what's a good price for a Springfield M1A standard?
I've seen them range from 1k-3k for a standard.. obviously there are weapon owners who's prices are a little... high.

Had a buddy of mine who also owns a Norinco M1A, I haven't heard anything too bad about them.. but chinese made rifles always put me off into the uncomfortable section, what's this forum's idea on them?

Also, I'm relatively new to shooting distance, I've been shooting obviously 300m-500m, and on my own personal time I've shot
500m, but want to start shooting a bit further, with the help of a glass. Anything decent priced 200-300 for 600m-700m distances?

Thanks everyone's information.

I bought a loaded model for 1300 used.

Get a bassett scope mount, only decent optic for that price I can think of is the SWFA super sniper. It is a fixed power made in japan with mil reticule and target knobs.

 

[tabby]

I bought a loaded model for 1300 used.

Get a bassett scope mount, only decent optic for that price I can think of is the SWFA super sniper. It is a fixed power made in japan with mil reticule and target knobs.

Yeah I just looked em up, heard nothing but good reviews on those.

I can't seem to find a normal one ... for 1300 haha

 

[Name Enough]

If you are patient you should pick up a loaded for $1400 used or $1550 new. I would recommend the loaded over the regular. You get a air gauged National Match Barrel and a better trigger.
I would highly recommend the Arms mount as it is the lowest available mount. However I am not sure it will work with a 50mm objective and 30mm tube. I hear the Basset mount is also good. Don't buy a Smith Mount until you read the installation instructions and are sure you can get it right. Sadlak also makes a great mount and a light weight paratrooper mount (it's expensive).

When you get yours if you shim the gas system ($10 for shims) and install a Sadlack National Match spring guide ($45) and use David Tubbs M1A recoil spring ($30) with the Sadlack National Match gas piston ($45) you can get it down to 1 to 1 1/2 MOA.
I have been a fan since 67 when my Uncle gave me a M14. Its a great battle rifle.

 

[kraigWY]

Just a hint to those who are thinking about M1A's. At the National Matches they have a Springfield M1A match. I just found out non-Springfield's aren't authorized in that match.

Doesn't affect me, mine is a Springfield, old one, 4 digit serial number 0068xx I got in '77.

Anyway, if I was to buy another one, I'd spend the extra money and get the Springfield.

 

[tabby]

Thanks Name! Yeah I've been deciding about shelling out the extra cash for a National.
How bout a scope? what do you think is a good one to choose from, say I had a $400 budget

 

[Name Enough]

Thanks Name! Yeah I've been deciding about shelling out the extra cash for a National.
How bout a scope? what do you think is a good one to choose from, say I had a $400 budget

Depends on what you want to do with the rifle. The M1a deserves to be shot with the iron sights for a starter. They are really excellent sights. The M14 (M1As daddy) was developed during the 50s and was never intended to be mounted with a scope. The problem is that the scope puts the shooters cheek weld way above the stock so a pad of some sort must be used. I prefer to keep this pad to a minimum. The Zeiss Conquest with a 3x9 and regular reticle can be had for about $400 when they are on sale which is usually during the summer. This has a 1"tube and 40MM objective. It will mount low in an Arms #18 mount. The mount should cost an additional $165 and then you need rings.

Here is a pic of my M1a with the Arms 18 mount and a Zeiss scope.
The cheek pad is old school M14. Foam pad wrapped with duct tape.
All those that have used this method please raise your hand.


This photo shows how low that scope can be mounted.


Here is my M1a Scout with an 18inch barrel and a Leupold long eye relief 2x8 scope. You notice I have the bipod mounted backwards so it won't snag on brush. This is my hog gun. I load it with 168 grain VLD on top of 41.5 grains of H4895 and with BR2 primers loaded out to 2.825 the chamber measures 2.84. The 22" barrel is too long for me to carry in the field. The 18"barrel has a lot better balance. I also have a Smith Enterprises Vortex flash hider as the brakes provided Smithfield are too loud. You may notice my home made cheek pad is a $4.95 shell holder that I padded with dense foam.


http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q610/zraypotter/importon5-12002_zpsed67e925.jpg

 

[tabby]

Depends on what you want to do with the rifle. The M1a deserves to be shot with the iron sights for a starter. They are really excellent sights. The M14 (M1As daddy) was developed during the 50s and was never intended to be mounted with a scope. The problem is that the scope puts the shooters cheek weld way above the stock so a pad of some sort must be used. I prefer to keep this pad to a minimum. The Zeiss Conquest with a 3x9 and regular reticle can be had for about $400 when they are on sale which is usually during the summer. This has a 1"tube and 40MM objective. It will mount low in an Arms #18 mount. The mount should cost an additional $165 and then you need rings.

Here is a pic of my M1a with the Arms 18 mount and a Zeiss scope.
The cheek pad is old school M14. Foam pad wrapped with duct tape.
All those that have used this method please raise your hand.


This photo shows how low that scope can be mounted.


Here is my M1a Scout with an 18inch barrel and a Leupold long eye relief 2x8 scope. You notice I have the bipod mounted backwards so it won't snag on brush. This is my hog gun. I load it with 168 grain VLD on top of 41.5 grains of H4895 and with BR2 primers loaded out to 2.825 the chamber measures 2.84. The 22" barrel is too long for me to carry in the field. The 18"barrel has a lot better balance. I also have a Smith Enterprises Vortex flash hider as the brakes provided Smithfield are too loud. You may notice my home made cheek pad is a $4.95 shell holder that I padded with dense foam.


http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q610/zraypotter/importon5-12002_zpsed67e925.jpg

THOSE ARE BEAUTIFUL RIFLES.
Sell me one

But those are seriously beautiful, yeah I want to start hunting so a .308 would be nice for decent sized game.

Those scope ring mounts, and scope mounts aren't that badly priced for the quality.

 

[08Cayenne]

I have a bone stock 2009 Loaded with a fixed 10x SS, have about $1700 total in it. Took it along on one long range road trip and played with it at distance. Once I got it dialed in was hitting a 17" round target at 800 yards and a a 24"x32" target at 1000 yards with factory ammo shooting prone with just a bipod. Nothing to really brag about but it did much better than I expected. I'd spend a couple hundred extra and get a Loaded.



20 round mag getting 100 yard zero.

 

[Toast]

I own a Norinco "M1A" DON'T BUY ONE. I just wanted one to plink with. Its fun, but not accurate. If you want a plinker, ok, but if you're interested in accuracy, you get what you pay for.

 

[tabby]

I own a Norinco "M1A" DON'T BUY ONE. I just wanted one to plink with. Its fun, but not accurate. If you want a plinker, ok, but if you're interested in accuracy, you get what you pay for.

Your post is really one of the first ones I've heard besides one other, for saying they're not accurate... what MOA you getting out of yours? and Yeah, I'm thinking 1200-1500 isn't too bad for it. (Springfield)

 

[Name Enough]

I own a Norinco "M1A" DON'T BUY ONE. I just wanted one to plink with. Its fun, but not accurate. If you want a plinker, ok, but if you're interested in accuracy, you get what you pay for.

Think this may require further research???

 

[Kreeper]

HERE IS MY M1A LOADED PURCHASED IN 09 FROM A DEALER IN FLORIDA. $1,700.00 WITH SHIPPING TO MY FFL+CALIFORNIA TAX AND D.R.O.S. IT SHOOTS 2moa WITH IRON SIGHTS AT 100 YARDS.. GREAT RIFLE.. PLEASURE TO SHOOT. NOT A PLINKER BY ANY MEANS.

 

[Redmanss]

A couple questions... First, what is your purpose for the rifle? I love the M1A, it's a classic, but at the same time it's limited in its versatility. Iron sights, across the course style shooting? Perfect. Hunting rifle? Maybe depending on your state and magazine restrictions while hunting big game, but still a bit heavy for that purpose. Range shooting at distance with a scoped rifle? There's better options for an auto loader.

M1As/M14s are finicky when trying to tighten them up, that's a given. They're a bitch to scope and when you do, you end up with awkward stock pads to provide proper cheek weld. Gaining a sub-moa capable rifle is expensive and time consuming in comparison to doing the same from a large frame AR. You can step into a DPMS SASS, which is typically cheaper and more accurate than a M1A right off the bat, while having the ability to easily swap barrels and calibers (much better options than .308), run P-Mags, and utilize a system that you being military are already very familiar with. Scoping it is cheaper as well; a simple set of rings or a one piece mount will get the job done with a flat top upper.

I'm not trying to bash on the M1A, as I said I love the classics, but they have their place and scoped rifle precision shooting on a budget isn't it. Actually, I would still refer you to the bolt action forum for that!

 

[oneshot onekill]

Your post is really one of the first ones I've heard besides one other, for saying they're not accurate... what MOA you getting out of yours? and Yeah, I'm thinking 1200-1500 isn't too bad for it. (Springfield)

Plain and simple... The Norinco's are JUNK!!! They're not just inaccurate. They can be dangerous. Some of the older ones are not properly heat treated and I've heard stories of both excessive wear because of that as well as catastrophic failures. These stories were Pre-Internet so don't bother researching but I remember seeing some of those that were just crappy.
I've owned 5 Springfield M1A's and can tell you even the Springfields can be hit or miss as far as accuracy (pun intended). 3 of mine were Supermatches. None of them shot better than MOA. But I never went heavy into the M1A. I understand they can be great if you treat them right. I can appreciate that but I don't treat my weapons like jewelry.

 

[81STFACP]

Don't sell the 14 types short.

Properly built M1A/M14 in the hands of capable marksman does not take backseat to any gas gun. Research the Interservice records. Despite the ubiquitous AR/M16 on the line these days, some of the records held by 14s are still standing, including the 1000 point agg. The record is 995-50X by a Marine.

On a very small scale my XC 14 type still holds our local club service rifle record on the reduced 600 at 200 yards, 200-17X. The x ring is 1.8 inches. This is prone slow fire with sling and irons.

After years of absence in the long range matches since 97 last year I took out my 14 type set up for long range and it broke the local service rifle record at 1000 yards previously held by a black gun. Irons and sling.

 

[kraigWY]

I'm with 81STFACP on this. First M1As don't need scopes, my best 1000 yards scores were fired with my M1A. We were shooting a team match at 29 Palms one year and our team (AK NG) was squaded next to the AMU team. I decided to score for the AMU guys hoping spy on their coach (which worked, I learned a lot).

Anyway they shot a 799/800 using M14s. (forgot the X count). Got to admit the poor kid who dropped that point caught holy hell.

I like the ARs for HP shooting, not that I can shoot it better them the M14/M1A, I can't. (The fact that I have 30 more years shooting the M1A in matches then I do the AR might have something to do with it).

The reason I like the AR is because it got more women and kids involved in High Power. Kids being the future of our shooting sports.

Over the last 35 or so years I've shot some great scores with the M1A, shot some bad ones too, but that wasn't the fault of the rifle.

I used the M14 in basic and use it until I went to Vietnam and switched to the M16a1, I used it (M21) in sniper school and taught sniper schools using the M14 (M21). If I learned nothing else, its if the rifle don't shoot, its the shooter 99% of the time.

Mines old, 4 digit Ser. # I got in 77 as a standard grade but was converted to a Super Match by Gene Barnett (Barnett Barrels) when he was an armor for the Guard at the Wilson matches.

It still shoots, other then replacing some shot out barrels and stretched out slings, I've never had a problem with it. It got me my DR badge.

 

[Toast]

Sorry, my prior post was ambiguous. Don't buy a Norinco. The M14 built by Springfield Armory, I've shot one, is awesome. Spend the money on a Springfield Armory M14, not a Norinco. My norinco shoots about 15moa.

 

[Smokerroller]

I am surprised no one has mentioned a Fulton Armory or other brand of M14. I have an M1A and would trade it in for a Fulton or Smith etc. Anyone else have an opinion on them?

 

[bluto51]

For your requirements I'd get a "Loaded" Springfield M1A. I run a Basset low mount on both my M21 and SOCOM
and a 50mm objective lens scope clears easily using TPS/TSR low rings. The Basset installs in under a minute (no kidding) and
holds very securely. My suggestion for optics in your price range would be a Vortex Viper. They're solid scopes
with good glass for around $450. I have a 6.5-20X50 on one of my .223 semi's and am very happy with it.
I'd say there's no problem hitting targets at distance, but squeezing sub MOA
accuracy out of an M1A can be an expensive and elusive quest. These are battle rifles. Consistent 1.5 to
2 MOA is closer to the norm. Check on the M14 forums. They have lots of experienced M14/M1A shooters
and you'll be hard pressed to find more than a handful claiming to have ever owned a consistent
sub-MOA M1A. With the right ammunition, lots of practice and a GOOD DAY you can get them to shoot
pretty well.

 

[81STFACP]

Sorry, my prior post was ambiguous. Don't buy a Norinco. The M14 built by Springfield Armory, I've shot one, is awesome. Spend the money on a Springfield Armory M14, not a Norinco. My norinco shoots about 15moa.

Do you want to get rid of the PxS 15 MOA Norinco? I might have a buyer for you.

 

[Toast]

Do you want to get rid of the PxS 15 MOA Norinco? I might have a buyer for you.

LOL Not right now. Its good for watermelons from 10 feet. I think I'll hack most of the barrel off and install a pistol grip.

 

[cacoltguy]

I recently posted a thread about shooting long range (600+) yards with an M1A. I currently own 2 AR-15's and a Springfield M1A National Match. I have shot both rifle platforms in Highpower competition so I feel like I have a good understanding of the capabilities of both platforms. My scores with the AR are definitely higher and it shoots more accurately all the way out to 600 yards. The AR-15 is an inherently more accurate platform for all the reasons mentioned above. M1A's that will shoot sub-MOA consistently day in and day out for an extended period of time are rare as hens teeth and doing so requires a bit of work in terms of glass bedding and gas system modifications to the original design. AR-15's can often shoot sub-moa with ease straight out of the box with good quality ammo or handloads. I have shot my M1A out to 1000 yards and yes it is capable but success depends on what your idea of accuracy is. As someone mentioned above, the Marine Corps had success shooting them in long range Highpower Matches at these extended distances but they were heavily modified dedicated 1000 yard rifles with gas ports modified for high pressure loads and a full time armorer standing behind the firing line to fix them when something broke or went down. The average M1A obviously wont be able to duplicate their success. I still think they are great guns despite requiring more maintenance to shoot accurately than an AR-15.

 

[broylz]

the biggest issue of the imported m14s seems to be a run of soft bolts. a usgi bolt conversion is pretty common. the forged receivers of the chicoms are actually pretty good for future builds as well.

 

[LRRPF52]

Can someone just post the link to the thread when we had this discussion the last time? There's a ton of great info in that thread. I'm tired of elaborating on it, though I'm a fairly fast typist.

 

[Name Enough]

Sorry, my prior post was ambiguous. Don't buy a Norinco. The M14 built by Springfield Armory, I've shot one, is awesome. Spend the money on a Springfield Armory M14, not a Norinco. My norinco shoots about 15moa.

y

I was puzzled by your post. The Norinco has a further disadvantage in that they are out of spec and many after market items wont' work or will work with modification.

 

[cruzie27]

Take a look on Gunbroker,. I snagged a Springfield Armory National Match M1A sitting in a SAGE chassis for $1800 bucks. I plan to put a Vortex viper PST (4.5-14x50mm, FFP) on it eventually, until then I will just work the iron sights.

 

[tabby]

Found a M1A scout for 1000.. But I'm debating the differences in the 18" to 22" barrel

 

[cacoltguy]

It depends on what you want to do with it. Out to a few hundred yards the barrel length difference probably wont matter much but if you want to shoot further than maybe 400 yards or so I would go with the standard 22 inch barrel. M1A's are already limited in terms of muzzle velocity since the gas system can't take hotter loads so the little extra velocity from a longer barrel is beneficial.

 

[alfson]

When last (1971 in Hawaii) I was shooting in rifle competition across the course and long range we(USMC teams) were shooting M1 Garands in 30-06, Navy teams were shooting M1 Garands in 308 winchester, and the Army teams were shooting M14s. In conversations around the campfire after the matches we came to the conclusion that the M14 might hold its accuracy just a little longer than the M1 but if they were rebuilt once a year there was no real difference. We also came to the conclusion that at short range the 308 might have a slight advantage due to less recoil but at long range it was all down to the shooter. For me I had better results with the M1 but that may have been more practice or just the difference in my rifles. Could also have been the ammo provided.

Because of the difference in the operating systems it looks like an AR10 will go a lot longer before needing a rebuild than a Garand system (M1 , M14, M1a and or whatever the Army is calling the new ones).

 

[Name Enough]

Found a M1A scout for 1000.. But I'm debating the differences in the 18" to 22" barrel

Wow if you don't want it - I do. I have a presentation grade walnut stock waiting for it. As was stated up to 600 yards I think the 18" barrel is GTG. Beyond that you may be better off with a bolt rifle anyway. For hunting I think it will be fine.

 

[bhart89]

I love my Norinco. I currently have a Sadlak mount and a SS fixed 10x on it now biput I'm going to go back to irons. It's a 2moa rifle with 168 FGMM so it's better suited to open sights for me. I'm also going to back to the standard GI fiberglass stock from the Promag JAE copy stock I have it in now.

 

[jetmd]

Lots of good info here:

Different

USGI and Chinese M14 parts, take a look at that section.

Also his site in general is full of information.

 

[Outdoor play]

I shoot my Uncles M1A when ever I get the chance. The receiver is low enough to date it back to 1972. It's hard to tell fact from fiction with some of his stories some times but I was a little more incline to believe him after seeing consistent sub moa groups with it at the local range. The range only goes to 200 so it's difficult to say what it does beyond that point. He claims it was built by his friends who worked at Fort Benning when he was stationed there in the early 70's. He had a manual that described the standard procedure for accurizing a NM M14. As I recall the key parts I remember were the bedding of the stock (his didn't come out without a mallet) a match barrel - trigger job and modification to the gas system including the gas piston.

I agree with the others that an AR type platform is still more accurate but if I were carrying a rifle through the mountains, I'd probably default to the M1a. I've had a sass and that barrel was HEAVY at 1.1 before the gas block and .9 after even with the flutes and shorter length, but it was more accurate than the M1a.

There are a couple things to consider when buying one of these rifles I have found. One is the quality of parts that go into them. The older springfields were built with Forged parts, but now bolts and op rods are cast as I understand. I understand after a heat treat it's arguable about how much of a difference it makes, but better parts cost more. Same with barrels and stocks. My point is that spending under $2000 for an M1a may not get someone who has come to expect a high standard of accuracy what they want out past 500. That's why in the end I opted to shooting my uncles instead of buying one myself. At least until the money tree takes a serious dump.

 

[tabby]

Man all of your rifles are just beautiful!
As for all the input on accuraizing an M1A I totally understand that, but for a base model, totally understandable...

I wouldn't mind an AR10, except I've worked with the AR15/M16A2-A4, M4A3 platforms so much I'm just done with them.
Cheek weld on an M1A, a cheek riser, or sand sock, beanie sock would fix that easy, shimming of the rifle.. take some time, as well as bedding of the stock.
I don't need an EBR stock to make it a distant shooter, so I'd stick to a decent stock, even the USGI synthetic for awhile.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

I don't own one anymore. Came down to the SA M1A or the mortgage; I still can't convince myself I made the right decision, nor that I didn't. When it came right down to it, the AR was already gone, and I will die with the Garand still in my possession; come hell, high water, or them revenuers...

All of the issues/problems that plague(d) the M1A have solutions now, just bring (lots of) money. Personally, if I wanted a .308 semi, it'd be something else, but I really can't buy into any of the alternatives. I compromised and got a Stag 6 Super Varminter, which I am DAMNED glad I got in before the ban. Not a .308, but it still has a decent reach.

Comparing the Stoner/AR design with the M1A (really just an upgrade to a piece of 1930's technology. Even without the technology advances, a scoped A3 has great ergos, a scoped M1A, I think not.

Yes I love that 1930's technology, ala Garand, but like the Garand, the M1A is an iron sight rifleman's battle rifle, not a LR scoped flea picker-offer...

Whereas, rodents beware when Staggie's back in town...; I just don't think I could bring myself to drop the hammer on a 'Chuck with a .308 (just too damned much gun...).

Norinco? The question never came up; Fulton Armory has some nice upgrades.

Greg

 

[Armiger]

I have an older M1A. At the time it came out it was designated the Bush model with all GI parts and according to the old timers the receiver was from the golden age of Springfield receivers. Now its called the Scout model. I considered scoping it but decided to leave it at is. Its in the original cammo fiberglass stock and most likely now is considered "retro". Still love shooting it with the irons.

 

[BCP]

08cayennes is about like mine although I have a leupold M3 scope and no bipod. Shoots about the same too.

Found a M1A scout for 1000.. But I'm debating the differences in the 18" to 22" barrel

I'd buy it and resell it on Gunjoker for 1200-1300 if you don't like it. That is a decent deal assuming it is not a lemon, believe me they are out there.

 

[Kiba]

I am surprised no one has mentioned a Fulton Armory or other brand of M14. I have an M1A and would trade it in for a Fulton or Smith etc. Anyone else have an opinion on them?

I had a Fulton Peerless M1A for about 10 years; ordered it in 2000 and received in in 2001. It was configured with all the usual NM stuff, an NM walnut stock, rear lugged receiver, and heavy Krieger barrel. I'm not sure what Fulton is building them with now but mine had all USGI parts (except for the barrel, receiver, and sights.)

Nice fit/finish, bedding job was good with a pillar & torque screw. Front ferrule & gas cylinder were unitized by TIG welding. Very reliable and quite accurate-- for load development I'd stick an ARMS 18 and a scope on it. After that I much preferred shooting the rifle with iron sights-- it just felt "right" configured that way.

I sold it back in January because I decided I didn't need 2 M1A's. My other M1A is an LRB M25 built by Ted Brown. All the NM stuff but with a medium weight barrel. I decided to keep the LRB over the Fulton because the built in scope mount of the LRB M25 receiver is super nice, no worries about a side mount that may or may not fit your receiver correctly depending on how it was machined. With the scope removed the M25 scope rail doesn't block use of the iron sights.

While I really like shooting the M1A with iron sights, with a scope mounted something just feels "off" to me-- not to mention trying to achieve (and then maintain) high levels of accuracy with an M1A gets expensive and IMO a little frustrating. Not saying it can't be done... but my old home built Armalite AR10 build was more accurate than both my Fulton Peerless and my Ted Brown M25 build for less than half the price of either.

Even though it might not print groups as small as my GAP10 or JP LRP-07 I still enjoy banging steel with the LRB with iron sights... it's fun and satisfying. Only when I stick the scope on it and try to shoot small groups on paper is when I get pissed at it. If you remember what the original design intent of the M14/M1A was and don't try and turn it into something it was never intended to be you and your wallet will be much happier.

 

[BCP]

I don't own one anymore. Came down to the SA M1A or the mortgage; I still can't convince myself I made the right decision, nor that I didn't. When it came right down to it, the AR was already gone, and I will die with the Garand still in my possession; come hell, high water, or them revenuers...

All of the issues/problems that plague(d) the M1A have solutions now, just bring (lots of) money. Personally, if I wanted a .308 semi, it'd be something else, but I really can't buy into any of the alternatives. I compromised and got a Stag 6 Super Varminter, which I am DAMNED glad I got in before the ban. Not a .308, but it still has a decent reach.

Comparing the Stoner/AR design with the M1A (really just an upgrade to a piece of 1930's technology. Even without the technology advances, a scoped A3 has great ergos, a scoped M1A, I think not.

Yes I love that 1930's technology, ala Garand, but like the Garand, the M1A is an iron sight rifleman's battle rifle, not a LR scoped flea picker-offer...

Whereas, rodents beware when Staggie's back in town...; I just don't think I could bring myself to drop the hammer on a 'Chuck with a .308 (just too damned much gun...).

Norinco? The question never came up; Fulton Armory has some nice upgrades.

Greg

Yeah if tiny groups are your thing from a semi it is impossible to beat the AR platform.

When I put together 223 and 308 ARs for myself and others if it doesn't shoot MOA or better with good ammo the barrel is on it's way back to the retailer that day.

With an M1A I'd say 2MOA is good and anything over that is a bonus, with sub-moa being the grand prize.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Honestly, it wasn't an easy choice, and I sometimes still regret the way it came down.

The final nail was the chambering. I had already divested all my other .308's in favor of the .260 Rem, and I was (and am...) still handloading for the Garand and two other .30-'06's.

IMHO, If I was going to keep a version of the Garand's technology, the Garand's chambering had a leg up over the M1A's.

Believe you me, I had a true love affair with the M1A; an M14 and I had managed to keep each other tickin' for a full tour in 'Nam. By the same token, I was also probably one of the last Marines to be formally trained on the Garand (ITR, Camp Geiger, early 1966).

As I said, not an easy choice...

Greg

 

[cacoltguy]

and if you want the ultimate in M1a/M14 stocks for accuracy you can lust after one of these lol.

Manufacturer of Precision Rifle Stocks | J. Allen Enterprises, Inc. (JAE)

Quite pricey, but with bedding blocks that are user tightened to snug up against the receiver and an adjustable "barrel tensioner" it addresses many of the accuracy issues of a standard M1A and wont need to be rebedded every 1000 rounds or so. Throw in a shimmed and unitized gas cylinder and you will get about as much accuracy as you can ever hope to achieve with the platform. Of course after its all said an done you could probably buy 2-3 AR rifles. I'm saving my pennies for one of the JAE stocks because for some reason I cant help trying to make this rifle into something it was never designed for lol.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

And another stock option...

 

[Kiba]

and if you want the ultimate in M1a/M14 stocks for accuracy you can lust after one of these lol.

Manufacturer of Precision Rifle Stocks | J. Allen Enterprises, Inc. (JAE)

Quite pricey, but with bedding blocks that are user tightened to snug up against the receiver and an adjustable "barrel tensioner" it addresses many of the accuracy issues of a standard M1A and wont need to be rebedded every 1000 rounds or so. Throw in a shimmed and unitized gas cylinder and you will get about as much accuracy as you can ever hope to achieve with the platform. Of course after its all said an done you could probably buy 2-3 AR rifles. I'm saving my pennies for one of the JAE stocks because for some reason I cant help trying to make this rifle into something it was never designed for lol.

Regarding the JAE stocks, I had one of the first 10 Gen 1's they made and I've had a Gen 3 on order for 22 months now (ouch.)

Great quality and ergos but a little on the porky side-- especially the Gen 1. The Gen 3 is lighter, but still a bit heavy.

I had nothing but accuracy problems with my LRB in the Gen 1 JAE compared to the bedded stock the rifle originally came with-- but the Gen 1 JAE didn't offer a ferrule/barrel tensioner and with the way my particular action fit in the Gen 1 the barrel and gas cylinder was free floated which isn't conducive to accuracy or repeatability in an M1A. The point of impact walked all over the place as the rifle warmed up, mostly up and to the left up to 6-7" at 300Y depending on how warm you got the barrel. Put it back in the bedded stock and it was a solid 0.9-1.0 MOA rifle with a steady POI.

The Gen 2 & 3 JAE stocks added an optional (should be mandatory IMO) barrel tensioner that takes care of that issue.

While the JAE and other chassis systems are good, if you ask any good M1A 'smith they'll all say the same thing-- the chassis systems are nice but if you're chasing every last bit of accuracy out of an M1A a properly bedded stock (like a McMillan) with a rear lug receiver and torque screw, and the appropriate front ferrule tension built into the bedding job is still the way to go. The chassis systems are nice for sure but they all require some level of compromise to ensure they'll fit different receivers with varying external dimensions whereas a bedded stock provides the tightest and most repeatable fit with your receiver.

Also, the rebedding every 1000 rounds myth is just that IMO-- a myth, or maybe more likely a continuation of practices back in the 70's and 80's with the bedding compounds available at the time. With a rear lug for lots of surface area, a torque screw in the lug and a pillar in the stock to keep things from moving excessively, modern tough & durable bedding compounds, and provided you aren't taking the action in and out of the stock every week a bedding job can last well past 2500 rounds in an M1A.

 

[cacoltguy]

Good points jiba. While what you say is true, the vast majority of M1a's are not double lugged and cant be fit to a stock the way you describe without some extensive gunsmithing costs. Its not mandatory to rebed every 1000 rounds of course but most convential bedding jobs will begin to wear out around that round count on a standard single lug design that uses nothing more than clamping pressure of the trigger group to hold it all together (another weak point in the original M14 design accuracy wise) My springfield national match came bedded from the factory and has about that number of rounds through it. I almost never take the action out if the stock but last week i did notice some small chips out of the bedding. It still shoots well but will only degrade with time. All chasis systems are a compromise since even the best machining cant ensure a perfect fit with every chasis and every action. Im attracted to the jae because the adjustable bedding blocks seem to address this.

 

[cacoltguy]

Kiba, with the jae, was the barrel tensioner something you had to mess with extensively to tune it just right or was it a simple straight forward process?

 

[Kiba]

Kiba, with the jae, was the barrel tensioner something you had to mess with extensively to tune it just right or was it a simple straight forward process?

My Gen 1 didn't have a tensioner-- it wasn't available. It was available starting with the Gen 2 stocks. Since my LRB never shot worth a damn in the Gen 1 because of the total lack of front ferrule tension I sold it and ordered a Gen 3. The rifle has been sitting unused about 21 months now without a stock as that's how long I've been waiting for the Gen 3 that I ordered. Some guys on M14 forum have been waiting 30+ months for their Gen 3's...

My plan for adjustment of the tensioner is similar to bedding an M1A stock-- apply about 7-8# down on the barrel just forward of the gas cylinder and and then I'll adjust the tensioner until it just touches the ferrule with that 7-8# applied. That should be a good starting point and I'll go from there.

My LRB receiver is rear lugged and can be bedded with a pillar & torque screw (I was planning ahead when I built the rifle just in case the JAE didn't work out); if the Gen 3 JAE doesn't shoot worth a damn either I'll sell it and go back to a bedded McMillan M3A or maybe give up on the scope thing entirely and go with a McMillan M1A.

Stock fitment and accuracy/repeatability issues related to stock fit are yet another reason why you're time and money ahead to pick an AR if you want to chase little groups with a semi. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from an M1A purchase, just warning you what you're in for...

 

[Name Enough]

To quote Kiba " If you remember what the original design intent of the M14/M1A was and don't try and turn it into something it was never intended to be you and your wallet will be much happier"

The M14 was designed as a rugged battle rifle. As such it shines.
One thing you may experience with the M1A is that after you have spent a lot of time getting it just right and getting it to shoot under 1 MOA - it will wander off and suddenly become a 1 1/2" to 2" MOA rifle. Competitive shooter say they don't take the rifle apart for cleaning until after the season is over. It gets out of wack easily - Its frustrating to say the least.
M1A owner will spend money trying to get the rifle to do things it doesn't want to do.
Last comment = I have tried different stocks and sold them off and now just use a regular walnut or fiberglass stock. Some how the rifle changes when placed into one of the modern stocks. The balance is not the same.