M1a - vs - AR308

[DrDeath]

I love my M1As, but the AR platform in 308 is really here to stay and the kinks have been worked out.
Now can a stock M1A with a good optic mount , in a OEM stock or a JAE or Sage or Troy chassis - can these shoot as well as a AR platform in 308?

 

[marduk185]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

id say yes.

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DrDeath</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Now can a stock M1A with a good optic mount , in a OEM stock or a JAE
or Sage or Troy chassis - can these shoot as well as a AR platform in 308? </div></div>

Yep, but it wouldn't hurt to employ a few NM mods like a well tuned trigger, NM op rod spring guide and an opened up muzzle device.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

I've been asking myself that same question. I happen to have good examples of both platforms, a SA M1a NM and a LMT MWS. Both have identical scopes in strong mounts, the M1A has ARMS and the LMT a GG&G. I have found no problems with either mount and the Super Sniper 3-9 are excellent SPR scopes. I have fired groups with both using different loads and the LMT is moa with a wider variety of ammo but both are more accurate that the shooter. I shoot mostly steel and both are excellent rifles for my purposes. This is a work in progress but if there is an interest I will post the results when finished.
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]
[img
img]
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]
[imgimg]

 

[The King]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

You can push both platforms to some extreme accuracy. I have seen .5moa M14's.

It's easier/cheaper to achieve in the AR-308. And you are closer to being within operational specs when you do it.

I also find the AR308 to have less flyers when tuned to this high of a level.

Recommendation - get an LMT MWS if you want a reliable battle rifle at a good price.

Get an OBR if you want precision+reliability.

Work on your M14 if you want something to fight with for a year.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mr.M14</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can push both platforms to some extreme accuracy. I have seen .5moa M14's.

It's easier/cheaper to achieve in the AR-308. And you are closer to being within operational specs when you do it.

I also find the AR308 to have less flyers when tuned to this high of a level.

Recommendation - get an LMT MWS if you want a reliable battle rifle at a good price.

Get an OBR if you want precision+reliability.

Work on your M14 if you want something to fight with for a year. </div></div>

Interesting observations and in general I would tend to agree with you. My interest is more middle ground, more DMR than battle rifle or precision. With the accuracy I'm seeing with my LMT it is way more than a battle rifle. Do you think the OBR is that much more accurate?

 

[The King]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

My factory OBR test target is .5moa. It is 4 shots .2moa and a flyer.

I have things I like about the OBR. It's a little lighter it seems. Oddly enough, I'm 99% sure I can change the barrel on it to a standard .260 remington barrel. It has a switchblock for a can.

The negative? the rail is taller than a standard AR. This makes sights and mounts aggravating without a PRS. I have a solution I think...but need to find a solution instead of sticking a tried and true AR15 compatible rig up there is a put off. The factory OBR mount is insane without a PRS - only use this if you absolutely need to (PVS-22/24 user).

The LMT has been reported to have varying accuracy. I think some of this is from people that have SS 5R barrel, and some have the Chrome Lined one. I have seen reports of 1.5moa, 1moa, .75moa, and .5moa.

I also think some of that is from the fact that shooting a gas gun is more challenging. A .5moa bolt gun shooter != a .5moa gas gun shooter.

1moa and .75 moa seem to be the most common reports. What are you getting for reference?

The LMT is $1000 cheaper though. The LMT is likely to be less expensive than the mods you would do an M14 to get it to shoot as well as the LMT.

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

The M14s that are used to build TACOM M14EBR-RI rifles are rack grade USGI rifles with chrome lined
standard weight GI barrels and they deliver 1 MOA or better after they are installed in SAGE EBR stocks.

It's just that easy without any additional tweaks, mods and no fighting with it for a year.

Also, the un-lined chrome moly barrels on most newer Springfield M1As should be more accurate than lined GI barrels.

 

[The King]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

H20Man -

A large part of the fight I describe has to do with commercial guns. Most of the USGI M14 recievers were tightly within spec and quite well made.

This wasn't my findings with commercial guns. Only a few of them I have worked with were correct in every dimension.

This caused issues primarily with optics mounting and fitting Troy MCS stocks.

Note my screen name. I have worked heavily on M14's and probably have wrenched on every common M1a out there. I always have and always will love the M14. One of the things I won't be doing anymore is a heavy barrel scoped M14. I feel the perfect role for the M1a platform might be embodied in the springfield scout rifle. 18" of lightweight power.

If you want something that runs, be it an M14 or AR-308 platform gun, buy it from a reputable source all done up the way you want to begin with. If you want to fight with it, roll your own.

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

Mr.M14 -

I agree with you about commercial reproduction receivers and parts not fitting and not functioning properly - CAVEAT EMPTOR.
That's why I use USGI, SEI, Norinco and Poly Tech parts and receivers for all of my M14s built by Smith Enterprise, Inc.
Issues with mounting optics are virtually eliminated with the SAGE EBR chassis system and some other modern stocks.

The 18" MK14 Mod 0, Mod 1, Bush and Scout are my favorite variants and I also have no interest in a heavy barreled M14.

 

[cubewarrior]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

M14s:
+ Slower felt impulse than most AR 308s.
+ Long front site base makes it a lot of fun for using irons.
+/- Less dirty than a DI AR, but a lot more dirty than a piston AR.
+ Less susceptible to failure due to dust/dirt.
- Everything is tougher/more expensive to work on / getting to inherent accuracy of the ammo you are firing is much tougher than with an AR.
- Harder on brass.
- Bedding an other issues require more periodic professional maintenance than an AR. You can avoid this with a chassis, but enjoy shooting that from anything but prone.
- Optics mounting solutions are inferior.
- Wood stocks are moisture-senstive.
- Must reconfirm zero after pulling the action for cleaning (not that big a deal, but a pain).
- Can blow up in your face if you don't seat primers correctly. (Much more of a problem than with an AR.)
- If you don't have an LRB or USGI, you may have receiver challenges associated with out-of-spec tolerances.
- Resale on all but pre-bans, LRBs, and SEIs really sucks.


ARs:
+ Easier to get one to shoot accurately--usually just a manner of getting a decent platform and tuning.
+ Usually easier on the brass.
+ Much better triggers, better other parts availability.
+ Holds its accuracy until something breaks or wears out.
+ Piston versions are much cleaner when running suppressed.
+ Not moisture sensitive.
+ Holds zero after standard cleaning.
- When 308 ARs get gritty, they get finicky.
- Resale on all but KAC sucks.

So, in application, this is a no-brainer. Go for the AR. With that said, many will find shooting an M14 more satisfying for recreational shooting as I do.

 

[akjaeger]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

Mine's a LRB M25, built as a complete rifle by LRB, All USGI internals, Saco Lowell Medium barrel, NM Flash Hider, Sadlak spring guide, SEI trigger job, Mcmillan M3A Stock, Ted Brown bedding job.
Set it up with a Nightforce 2.5 X 10, Npr-2 reticle, MOA knobs, zero-stop.
Shoots 168 AMax's @ 2700fps into 5" groups at 500 yds.
Now why would I want a stinkin' AR-10?

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CubeWarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
- If you don't have an LRB or USGI, you may have receiver challenges associated with out-of-spec tolerances.</div></div>

USGI receivers are unobtainable so I see the best receivers in this order: SEI, Norinco, Poly Tech and LRB.


BTW, SEI currently has two of their new receivers on hand for testing.

 

[cubewarrior]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

H2O--

Waiting for the reports on the SEI receiver...

Why would you put the Poly or Norinco in front of the LRB in quality?

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CubeWarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">H2O--

Waiting for the reports on the SEI receiver...

Why would you put the Poly or Norinco in front of the LRB in quality?

</div></div>

The ChiCom receiver is currently dimensionally closer to USGI than LRB, but LRB is catching up.

NOTE: There is nothing wrong with LRB receivers and I would own them if ChiCom rifles/receivers were not available for less.


I am also looking forward to reports on the new SEI receivers and I will buy one even though I have no plans to build a new rifle.

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CubeWarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">H2O--

Waiting for the reports on the SEI receiver...

Why would you put the Poly or Norinco in front of the LRB in quality?

</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Update:</span> WarBird has recently voiced concerns with the quality of LRB receivers, contact him for details.



For those of you wanting SEI's new Barstock receiver you have until 09/28/2010 to get your name on the waiting list.
Visit The M14HDW Forum and look for the post titled <span style="font-weight: bold">SEI M14 Barstock Receiver</span>.

Price: $950-ish



.

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: H2O MAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The ChiCom receiver is currently dimensionally closer to USGI than LRB, but LRB is catching up.

</div></div>


H20 -

A) Where are you getting your information?
B) What was the serial number range of the LRB that you are basing your claim on?
C) Please tell us the answer - is there one set of specs out there for all USGI receivers?
D) Warbird's issue - Warranty?


Good luck

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

MrM14 - have you had any failures to feed or extract with your AR10 style platform?

I ask this because I have had 3 of them - 2 being Armalite pattern customs and one a stock DPMS - all routinely had failure to feed issues - even with all recommended tweeks to mags, factory ball, factory match, and handloads.

To the OP - CubeWarrior's list is pretty good. One other thing that should be added to the list - the average age of an armorer that really knows the platform. If I were to make a guess most of them are in their 50's and 60's. USGI parts are getting both more scarce and expensive daily. LRB / Smith and a couple others are supposed to be working on dimensionally correct receivers / op rods / bolts but these are slow to market, will still be spendy, and need fitting. (I have seen / held in my hand an LRB prototype bolt that looked really good FWIW). Whereas you can not throw a rock without hitting an AR10 part manufacturer.

Long way around to saying IMHO - if you set 100 '14 pattern guns and 100 AR10 style guns on a line - some custom some stock and unwrapped 100 mags right out of the package for each - the AR10s would out shoot them in terms of accuracy (probably by a wide margin). What I don't know - but would bet - the '14s would out run them by an equal margin - esp if you got them very dirty and hot. However, if we have a permanent ban, an AR10 pattern is something that anyone can work on themselves whereas a '14 only a few aging smiths can.

Doesn't mean I am correct.


Good luck

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: H2O MAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The ChiCom receiver is currently dimensionally closer to USGI than LRB, but LRB is catching up.

</div></div>


H20 -

A) Where are you getting your information?
B) What was the serial number range of the LRB that you are basing your claim on?
C) Please tell us the answer - is there one set of specs out there for all USGI receivers?
D) Warbird's issue - Warranty?


Good luck </div></div>

A) Quoted from my M14 armorer and personal satisfaction with builds on ChiCom receivers.
B) Evidently issues with LRB receivers are more prevalent than I thought... year 2004 to present.
C) As I understand it, there is a USGI drawing for the receiver.
Different's M1A site and his books would be a better historical source for the specific details.
D) Go to AR15.com and find "What happend at LRB ??" posted by WCG a.k.a. WarBird

Best of luck.

 

[Different]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">C) Please tell us the answer - is there one set of specs out there for all USGI receivers?</div></div>

Drawing F7790189 (sheets 1 through 4) from the U. S. Army M14 Rifle Technical Data Package

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

H2O - good info - I'd never seen that. I have an LRB receiver in the 0169X range and you made me pull it, and a ban era Springer NM apart to look at the safety bridge. My LRB is at the high end of the spec quoted, and the Springer is pretty far over spec.

On the note of Specs for both you and Different - I had some trigger work done on my LRB by Ted Brown (GAP built the LRB) and he told me that there are actually several period correct USGI receiver spec sheets out there. Yes? No?

Thanks again

Good luck

 

[Different]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On the note of Specs for both you and Different - I had some trigger work done on my LRB by Ted Brown (GAP built the LRB) and he told me that there are actually several period correct USGI receiver spec sheets out there. Yes? No?</div></div>

Like many manufacturing drawings, the USGI M14 receiver drawing F7790189 has been revised a number of times. It was last revised in January 1986, Revision letter V. The heat treatment requirements were finalized in Revision J dated August 1961. There is one USGI M14 receiver blueprint drawing, F7790189 sheets 1 through 4. Other drawings related to the USGI M14 receiver are the Inspection Equipment List and Quality Assurance Provisions.

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

But effectively - from what your saying - yes, there are many revisions but there is ONE spec. Correct?

TIA


Good luck

 

[Different]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But effectively - from what your saying - yes, there are many revisions but there is ONE spec. Correct?</div></div>

There is one <span style="font-weight: bold">drawing</span> which specifies material, dimensons and heat treatment requirements for the USGI M14 rifle receiver. The drawing number is F7790189. It has four sheets detailing all of the manufacturing requirements because it is a complex part to make. This is the manufacturing blueprint for the receiver, the heart of the M14 rifle.

There is one military specification for the M14 Rifle, MIL-R-45012 Revision E dated 6 January 1971.

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

Thank you both.


Good luck

 

[MK14 SEI]

Re: M1a - vs - AR308

My next EBR will be built on one of these.