[Skunkabilly]

What can I do to make my M1A not feel like a cheesy $1350 SKS? Send it off to get better parts in it, refinished and get a new stock that won't chip before I even get to shoot it?

Would Smith Ent be a good place to do this or will I be able to pay off my car with what it'll take to do it?

[MMcCall]

Your medicine is spelled F-A-L. You can thank me later ;)

[Frohickey]

What is wrong with your M1A?
What makes it feel 'cheap'?

[Schuey2002]

Yeah, what?? The stock?? The finish??;)

[Mannlicher]

My M1A does not feel, look, or shoot like a 'cheesy SKS'. In fact, I have never seen any M1A that looked like that. I wonder what you mean. Do you really feel that way? Why? This makes no sense at all.

[Dave P]

"stock that won't chip "

What kind of stock did you get? A plastic one? If so, goto Freds for a real mans stock (walnut)!

www.fredsm14stocks.com/

[BenW]

Or go to Fred's and get a plastic stock and paint it with regular paint instead of that textured stuff. Then it won't chip either.

Or, since Springfield uses surplus plastic stocks just like Fred sells, just strip the textured coating off yours and repaint it. :)

[El Tejon]

[Sigh] Brasshopper, you must expel the CDI from your internal "Iwannacoolgunvirus" self so that you may reach true gunfu as you walk the earf.

Beat on your gun with a 23 oz. framing hammer. In this way, the way of the gun, it will not appear cheesy, but rugged.:D

[Sir Galahad]

I got to fire an M1A a couple months ago. Guy at the shootin' area had one and I let him try my Ruger International and he let me try his M1A. I saw nothing "cheap" in this weapon. I found it to have the heft and feel of a real weapon. The design comes from the last great U.S. RIFLE (as opposed to carbine style, intermediate calibered weapons) and is not even in the same ballpark as a SKS. Don't get me wrong; I'm a Soviet firearms fan myself. But the M1A as I handled it, is a nice weapon. When it comes to .308, I'm a bolt action man myself, but if I wanted a semi .308, it'd be a M1A.

But you know what? You're talking about military weapons each and all from M1A, FAL, and SKS. If you want a .308 that IS a solid rifle, lay hands on a good bolt action .308. Now THAT'S a rifle!

[Gewehr98]

If it's simply the cosmetics of the baseline Springfield, Inc. black stock, that can be changed quite easily. Now, if the gun feels clunky to you because of the workings of the action, that just requires some selective tweaking. You've got enough money sunk into that M1A just in purchase price, it's more than twice the price of a kitbashed CETME or kitbashed FAL, and for a reason. You've satiated your "Iwannacoolbattlerifle" urge with that M1A, and nobody should knock you for that choice. Take a look over at Fred's website for some nice wood or camouflaged synthetic furniture. If the gun is so loose it detracts from your shooting experience, give the folks at Springfield Inc. a call. They'll make good on it.

[dude]

While your M1A may feel cheap to you, what you have is a MAN'S GUN that is solid and formidable.

wood and steel

If you want something that feels 'pretty' or 'fancy' with that RAMBO look............. go with the plastic guns.



FWIW--A plain old M14 does not feel cheap to the US Navy Seal teams!!

[Sir Galahad]

How's this---Lever action: Assault rifle 1880s style.

"Tactical?! We don't need no steenken tactical! We don't got to show you no steenken tactical!"

Besides, I hear tell leather gunbelts never go out of style. And they come in black, too. :D

[SIGarmed]

The problem is you may get a good M1A or a bad one. I don't think there are many bad ones though. There are lemons in every brand, make, and model of device known to man. There aren't as many GI parts in these guns today as these parts are drying up. This may or may not be a problem in the function of the M1A, but not so much with the finish. You might try and take that issue up with Springfield Armory.

I've got two, a Scout and a National Match. The NM doesn't look as "cheap" as scout IMHO.
Something about match barrels and extra thick walnut stocks. :)

[Marshall]

I want a National Match so bad I can taste it. Shot one about a year ago and fell in love! I thought it was very hefty, manly and all that testosterone stuff! Shot a hell of alot more accurate than my M1 carbine, of course. Wood is the only way to go. ;)

I am a Bolt Gun man myself, with a couple of lever guns. Must be why I want one so bad? But, at $2,000.00 the little woman say's I have higher priorities right now. Grrrrrr, I'll have to scrutinize that a little more. :scrutiny:


:)

[buttrap]

well just remember that the new ones are a made in Koriea action and pretty cheesie internals, some kind of MIM or cast junk. Really big differance between the new vs bit older M-1a with GI parts. The just are not what they used to be at all.

[twoblink]

The need for a "black tactical stock" is what is doing your rifle in..

get a man's stock (wood!!) and you'll love your M1A again.

That french version you have in your hand, fix it up..

[trapshooter]

Skunk,

Sent you a PM.

[uglymofo]

Twoblink,

How do you know he's got a french version?? I thought this one had been fired... that's why the real french guns are soo expensive:).

Skunk,

What's so cheesy? I've never heard anyone call their SA cheesy.

[Skunkabilly]

http://www.whamocamo.com/GW5.jpg

Wood? I think the Skunk needs one of these :D

there's somewhat of a gap between the receiver and the stock.

Maybe I'll send it back to one of those places that has 'metallurgical' (sp?) inspection or will that be a waste?

Have the cheesy components swapped out with USGI parts?

They put the wrong front sight on there, and it zeros in 20 clicks up and that rear sight is pretty high. Stock chips like a bad paint job.

[Marshall]

OH I see, it's the fake bark that's chipping. :neener:

[Frohickey]

Skunky...

Go over to Fred M14 stocks (http://www.fredsm14stocks.com/catalog/stocks.asp), and go through their catalog. Order yourself one of their Select M14 stocks or even the cheaper Select2 for $12.50. Take it home, get some sand paper, some flat earthtone paints, and get to work. Nothing takes away the 'Frenchiness' of a gun than your own customized work. At $12.50, you can afford to practice your refinishing and painting technique.

As to MIM parts, how long ago did you buy your M1A? Plus, you can shop around for genuine GI parts for the M1A, even get some spares.

[Skunkabilly]

M1A Scout is probably a late 2001 model.

[Frohickey]

From Fulton-Armory's FAQ on spare parts for the M1A...

M14/M1A Spare Parts Kit Recommendations
by Clint McKee

from rec.guns... What spare parts ought the shooter keep on hand for basic operator maintenance of his M14/M1A rifle?

Depends on how much you shoot, and, how long you want to maintain the rifle. With the current import restrictions, you may want to get a deep & thorough spares inventory. The original G.I. stuff is dwindling fast, and lots of rewelded, commercial cast reproductions, Chinese, worn out, etcetera, parts are becoming, sadly, commonplace.
Keep in mind that a bad spare part is NO spare part.
First line (bare bones minimum):
extractor
extractor spring
ejector & spring
firing pin
hammer
hammer spring housing
hammer & trigger pins
trigger & sear
bolt roller & retainer
front sight screw
flash suppressor nut
flash suppressor set screw
gas piston
spindle valve spring
spindle valve pin
spindle valve
connector lock
connector lock pin
op rod spring

Second line (preferred), and to include the items above as well:
bolt complete (headspaced to your rifle)
bolt stop, pin & spring
elevation knob
rear sight cover
windage knob
op rod guide & pin
trigger guard
trigger spring
safety
safety spring

Third line (deep support for the future), and this includes the 1st & 2nd lines above:
op rod
trigger housing
trigger guard
flash suppressor
front band
gas cylinder
gas cylinder plug
gas cylinder lock

[ether]

I have an M1A and really enjoy it. With that said, the average SKS is made with better parts than the M1A's made today. Sad but true.

[BHP9]

Would Smith Ent be a good place to do this or will I be able to pay off my car with what it'll take to do it?

I think you have the right idea if you are able to come up with all the money it would take to build a quality M1a . These days you certainly won't get if from Springfield.

I have several friends that had M1A's built on original forged Smith Recievers. The balance of the gun had all forged G.I. parts put in them. They are all very happy after having their guns built up to National Match standards. Trigger job, glass bedding, grenade launching valve welded shut, flash hider bored out etc.

Today Springfield is using more junk cast parts in place of G.I. parts than ever before and they need to be trashed as soon as you get the rifle. So if you decide to go with a Springfield this is what you must expect.

Today in competition the M1a is pretty much a thing of the past. It must be rebedded every couple of years compared to the Match AR15 which never needs bedded.

Cost of .308 ammo (match grade not junk military surplus) is very high compared to match grad .223 ammo.

If you must have a .308 battle rifle the M1A is certainly a better choice in all ways (execpt monetarily) than getting any other .308 battle rifle. Many of course will go for the cheap way out but the M1a has so many advantages over the other .308's that it would take me a page of response to go into them all.

The ergonomics of the M1a certainly stand out.

A conventional stock that is lightening fast to the shoulder compared to any straight stocked battle rifle.

A lightening fast safety located in the trigger guard.

Superior and easily adjusted rear sights.

An easily modified trigger that can be made match ready.

A big supply of custom gunsmiths that can turn the average M1a from a superior shooter into a precision grade target arm.

Instant ability to mount rigidly, a scope or electronic sight (try mounting quickly a scope on some of the other battle rifles.)

An option of not only a knock out beautiful walnut wood stock but a walnut handguard as well. Compare this to plastic battle rifles.

There are many .308 battle rifles to choose from starting from the $300 dollar stamped sheet metal Cetme rifles up to the expensive National Match M1a. You basically get what you pay for.

if you want to compete in competition you have to pay the money Very few of the other battle rifles have ever been widely used in serious competition. In NRA High Power Rifle competitors must use the very best to win and when talking semi-auto .308 rifles the dominate semi-auto .30 caliber has always been the M1A and not without many good reasons.

[Gewehr98]

Fred has a nice selection of stocks, from plain-vanilla wood, to presentation-grade wood, to plain synthetic, to pretty synthetic. I was never really keen on Springfield's M1A, only because I saw firsthand some poor QC on one of their receivers in 1991. So I bought a Baltimore Maryland Armscorp M14NM receiver, still made in the USA, and a H&R M14 parts gun when they were still available (Well, that and a Krieger barrel). It's a Fred's "Ambush" color scheme. This gun took me far in High Power, but it did get the gas system unitized, Devcon and metal bedding, and a reamed flash hider. It was so much fun with iron sights I went the next step and made an M-21 out of it. No reason, as long as your receiver is sound and square, that you can't have a rifle that will be the envy of other shooters. Don't forget, once you leave the PRK, you can ditch the muzzle brake and put the flash hider back on, sans bayo lug, of course.

http://mauser98.com/m14nmbench.jpg

[twoblink]

Skunk, thy name is now Greywolf..

Do it! Keep the M1A, you won't regret it!

[dude]

ether's wise quote from above--" I have an M1A and really enjoy it. With that said, the average SKS is made with better parts than the M1A's made today. Sad but true."


...........funny you should mention that!! I could not agree with you more.


Just today I was shooting with my neighobor and we met up with one of his old High School friends who is a trust-funder with all the money he will ever need. No military expierence but he has alot of nice weapons. As I brought the three rifles out that I had brought he sort of smirked at my old shorty 'Cowboy Companion' SKS and said " is that one of those Chinese carbines?? I've heard they are not very accurate with that funny poor AK round." I asked if he had ever shot one and he said no. I just let it go............ and after setting up a box of orange clays on the 100 yard berm we blasted away for a while.

Soon I offered him the SKS and mentioned that that 'funny' AK round has most likely killed more folks than any other caliber and that the SKS is perhaps the smoothest semi-auto in the world. I then showed him how to chamber the first round and release the saftey.


Needless to say he was suprised and did very well. He pretty much buys a new gun every month btw and I bet the next time I see him he will be sporting an SKS!!


btw- he is a very good shooter and when offered my Baby Eagle compact 9mm that he had never touched before, he hit a 6" shoot&see target at 50 yards 6 out of 10 times. Better than I can do!!

[mark mcj]

WOW!!!!!!


I have been hashing around the idea of getting an M1A but, I must reconsider my thoughts.....

I go and shuck out 1200 bucks for a rifle and I have to buy a stock from Fred's, replace all the parts with GI replacements, and get a parts kit that has everything but a barrel?

And this will get the "cheap" feel out of my rifle???????????

I'm not rocket scientist, but that's not right. IMO

[dude]

There is nothing wrong with the wood stock on a new Springfield Armory M1A. ...............nor have any of my shooting bros who have them had any problem with the 'guts'

[Skunkabilly]

So what parts should I replace on my M1A?

[dude]

the ones that break or malfunction

........if any ever do

[Frohickey]

All this talk about 'uncheapifying' is just Skunky. The normal Springfield M1A is plenty good. So what the krinkle-paint on the synthetic stocked one chips a little bit. So far, I haven't seen any change in accuracy. The desire for getting a new stock and handguards and paint job is just a desire to personalize the weapon (firearm) more to fit me. That, and if my butcher-job on the OEM stock doesn't work, I still have another stock on hand to keep the rifle shooting.

For me, the stock is a bit longer than I would like it, and shortening it an inch or two would do wonders for handling, while not at all changing the sight radius and accuracy.

As for swapping out parts and whatnot, I would not even do so. I would just get my spare-parts kit for the M1A together, getting genuine US GI parts for these, for if/when the OEM parts break.

I think that Skunky just sucks at rifle shooting, and is trying to blame it on the rifle. :what:

Skunky, wanna come on up here and do a NRA Hi-Power match? We can swap rifles and see if its the rifle or the shooter. :p

[gk1]

Weapons purchased for their looks suffer far more from cosmetic problems than those purchased for function.

Since it functions fine (I assume), don't change anything internal unless it breaks, or otherwise quits working.

The only things that need to change are your perception of the rifle as "cheap" based on the chipped paint, and, as twoblink said, lose the plastic, and I'll bet that the rifle "magically" stops seeming cheap and starts taking on some of the mystique that everyone else is talking about (except that yours has a short barrel). ;)

George

[Byron Quick]

Just a comment about the forged vs. cast thingey. I was talking with a metal worker a while back and we began to discuss the forged vs. cast. He had two points to make:

1) The technology of casting has improved by leaps and bounds in the past five decades. So what was true about this comparison in 1952 ain't necessarily so today.

2) A good modern casting will beat a bad modern forging each and every time. Yes, bad forgings do exist.




My Springfield Loaded doesn't strike me as being "cheap."

[Bostonterrier97]

I have a Super Match it is a VERY solid Rifle and it is my most accurate Semi-Auto Battle Rifle. It just flat out shoots any of my FALS and AK's and it definately gives my AR's a run for their money.

I love this rifle.

[Sactown]

My M1A has been fantastic, although I only have a couple thousand rounds through her. No parts breakage or malfunctions. Mine doesn't seem cheap at all. My M1A isn't a safe queen so I've come to expect dings and scratches. In the normal course of usage, it's going to show wear/character. It's like getting a new car, you worry about the scratches/dings til you get the first one. It's my favorite rifle.

[Destructo6]

Maybe the reason you don't see many National Match G3s, FALs, etc is because they're not elligible to compete in National Match. In other words, the assertion that their non-existance implies poor suitability is bogus evidence.

It's as idiotic as saying that a Blaser 93 or Accuracy International can't be too accurate because you never see them in National Match Competition.

Having said that, why not give a different stock a try before you 86 the M1A? It's a fine rifle and it's probably as good as you'll get in .308 until you leave CA.

[CWL]

Here Skunk,

If Fulton Armory can't make you a better M1A, try Troy Industries.

http://www.troyind.com/SOPMOD%20M-14.htm

They can customize your M1A into something super-uber-tactical!

You may need to move outta CA to get all the features though.

[MarineTech]

Skunk, you will probably want to pick up the following items to keeps as spares. Make sure you pick up USGI where you can. These are some of the most common parts that fail and having spares on hand really cuts the downtime if something does break.

Op rod and op rod spring
Bolt assembly
trigger group (standard or NM, depending on what you have) You could also supplement the Trigger Group Repair kits that a number of companies offer. These include most of the pins and springs for the trigger group.

Most of these assemblies can be purchase complete which make things much easier to swap in and out quickly. You can then isolate and replace the broken part in the assembly at your leisure.

[BHP9]

Maybe the reason you don't see many National Match G3s, FALs, etc is because they're not elligible to compete in National Match. In other words, the assertion that their non-existance implies poor suitability is bogus evidence.

Not accurate info. You can use all of these weapons in the match rifle catagory.

If you spend enough money any rifle could probably be modified such as installing a good set of adjustable sights (they come with the M1a) or finding a custom gunsmith that works on your particular favorite rifle. A possibility, but with so many smiths that specialize in the M1a why bother with such exotic or rare rifles.

It's as idiotic as saying that a Blaser 93 or Accuracy International can't be too accurate because you never see them in National Match Competition

I think the answer here is that old hands know that you certainly do not need to spend big bucks for exotic prima-donna rifles that will shoot no better than the garden variety M70 Winchester or Remington 700. Rifles like the Remington and Winchester can be modified for way less money and the custom add ones like instantly adjustable butt stocks and crank up cheek pieces suite the needs of the match shooter much better than say sniper rifles that were designed for the military that may have stocks that are not as quickly adjustable or have stocks that are not suited to offhand or even in some cases prone postion shooting without the use of a bipod.

The rifles balance is also one of great importance and not just any exotic prima donna military bolt gun or semi-auto rifle will work out as well as an M1a in its basically stock configuration or a built up Winchester or Remington that has a stock designed for competition.

These are some of the reasons the exotic rifles are seldom seen in this type of competition. They are just not the best for the job unless they are heavily modified. All the extra expense and experimentation is just not worth the time to many people when rifles that have been used for years are available ready to go for match competition or are easily modified for such competition and at way less expense.

[BHP9]

1) The technology of casting has improved by leaps and bounds in the past five decades. So what was true about this comparison in 1952 ain't necessarily so today.

I have to disagree, if anything castings have gotten worse not better and here is why. The lastest form of casting that has taken the gun industry by storm is the MIM casting. It is proving to be a massive failure with early parts breakage a chronic problem.

2) A good modern casting will beat a bad modern forging each and every time. Yes, bad forgings do exist.

I suggest you take a look at some industrial catalogs that list tools such as even the ubiquitous "C" clamp as a good example. Given the same heat treatment and metal thickness the forging is 2 1/2 times stronger than the traditional casting and way more stronger than the MIM casting.

Castings are heat treated all the way through which makes even a good casting way more brittle than a forging. Forgings can even be heat treated on the outside only that gives them tremedous strength but their cores can be left less hard which gives the forging the ability to withstand sudden and violent shocks without cracking or shattering, a common problem with castings.

There is no casting made that given the same heat treatment and thickness can even compare to a quality forging.

When custom pistols are built the first thing that is thrown away is the cast parts and people are today paying big bucks to have custom forged parts installed both in pistols and rifles.

[Gewehr98]

I can certainly rise to the challenge. I did do something idiotic with an FAL once.

I built a match-grade FN-FAL semiauto clone about 10 years ago. I wanted a rifle that would be economical, reliable, and still put me into the 10 and X-ring for High Power matches, even if it were under the foreign service rifle category. The gun was a labor of love, a Winchester Model 70 heavy target barrel in .308 was rethreaded, gas-ported, and contoured to work in the FAL (betcha folks didn't know that was a conversion possibility, did ya?). Australian coachwood furniture was installed and tweaked around the barrel interface. The trigger group internals were polished. I even located an adjustable Hythe rear sight.

At the end of the day, the gun wouldn't shoot any better than a properly-assembled M14/M1A. I won't even mention how much labor and money was dumped into it, over and above the cost of a comparable 1992-vintage M1A. Cool gun, it looked really nice with the coachwood and gray/green parkerizing. I sold it at a loss to a Kalifornian who wanted one before the '94 Crime Bill went into effect. Wonder if he registered it under SB-23?

[Steve Smith]

Maybe the reason you don't see many National Match G3s, FALs, etc is because they're not elligible to compete in National Match. In other words, the assertion that their non-existance implies poor suitability is bogus evidence.

I like BHP9's answer to what you said is much, I'm going to repeat it.

Not accurate info. You can use all of these weapons in the match rifle catagory.



I think the answer here is that old hands know that you certainly do not need to spend big bucks for exotic prima-donna rifles that will shoot no better than the garden variety M70 Winchester or Remington 700. Rifles like the Remington and Winchester can be modified for way less money and the custom add ones like instantly adjustable butt stocks and crank up cheek pieces suite the needs of the match shooter much better than say sniper rifles that were designed for the military that may have stocks that are not as quickly adjustable or have stocks that are not suited to offhand or even in some cases prone postion shooting without the use of a bipod.


The bottom line is that any of those rifles may shoot as Match Rifles and the scores are 100% equitable to Service Rifle scores. No serious competitor uses G3s or FALs. For that matter, most serious competitors are leaving the M1A behind too..but it was a far sight better than the others that were mentioned. BHP9 is also correct about AI and Blaser rifles. The don't shoot any better than a custom 700 or 40X or any other long time match rifle. The Tubb2000 is now the big dog, and it is still cheaper than AI.

[flipchop]

just bought a standard springfield armory M1A with synthetic stock. called SA they said i couldn't do any glass bedding is this true. do i need to get a totally new stock.

[cvb]

now on total 8k rnds without cleaning.
used mostly on 3gun. sand and dirt
everywhere my friends cringe whenever
they handle the trigger. stock beat up
as heck. ugly rust on the flash/bbl end.

a nice clean forged dodddad
m1a to me is cheap, cheesy stuff that
needs to be sent to the back of the safe
along with your girly toys.

[Exposure]

now on total 8k rnds without cleaning.
used mostly on 3gun. sand and dirt
everywhere my friends cringe whenever
they handle the trigger. stock beat up
as heck. ugly rust on the flash/bbl end.

a nice clean forged dodddad
m1a to me is cheap, cheesy stuff that
needs to be sent to the back of the safe
along with your girly toys.

In English please.........

[MechAg94]

BHP9, it is great that you think so highly of forgings, but I think you miss the point. If I had over $2000 to spend on an M14, I might go with an LRB or Fulton, but if all I have is $1500 or less, SA is the only game in town for a new rifle. It is great that custom guns use a lot of forged parts. However, I don't own any custom guns and don't have the money to buy them. If cost is no object, we would all buy perfect guns, but that ain't the case. SA is doing a decent job of supplying an affordable alternative that works.

I agree with the other post, I'll take a quality cast part over a bad forging any day. BAD being the operative word of that statement.

[Destructo6]

Holy thread resurrections, Batman!

This is about 3 years old!

[1911JMB]

You guys are doing a very good job of making me all the happier to have went for the SA58:neener:

[trbon8r]

The only way to get an M1A that isn't "cheap" is to buy a receiver and build one out of USGI parts. If you pick up an M1A made up of reproduction parts, and one made with GI parts it's easy to tell the difference.

I've seen the gamut of problems with SA Inc.'s reproduction parts:

Op rods that are crooked or otherwise out of spec
Extractors that disassemble themselves upon firing
Remember SA Inc.'s cast bolt recall?
Rear sights with badly cut pinions that won't hold zero
Rear sight graduation marks that aren't even legible
Out of spec trigger housings that make disassembly/assembly a real pain
That lame C clip used to hold the elevation knob in place instead of using of the proper screw

I'm not against castings at all. Properly done they will last for many thousands of rounds. The SA Inc. receivers prove that. The problem lies in the execution, and a lack of commitment to making quality parts. That's where SA Inc. drops the ball.

[MechAg94]

I didn't catch the age of the comments above mine. I wouldn't have bothered. :)