yet another M1A question...and yes, i did use the search function first...


PDA






boots
March 10, 2008, 06:46 AM
i live in california, and i want a battle rifle with detatchable magazines...


the best choice is an m1a of some type...

i have decided on either a scout model or a socom...

not sure which one to get...my first priority is reliability...second priority is reliability and third priority is a tossup between reliability and accuracy...


i have done some research and both models should run about $1500...


i want a rifle that can be manuverable indoors and can serve as a cqb weapon and can also hit accurately out to 250-300 yards...and like i said before, reliability is a must...

thanks for your time...

If you enjoyed reading about "yet another M1A question...and yes, i did use the search function first..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
H2O MAN
March 10, 2008, 09:49 AM
Either will serve you well out to 300 yards - both have a muzzle brakes and detachable box mags.
If you find an original SOCOM 16 there is a good chance it will have a few USGI parts.

HTH ~

TexasRifleman
March 10, 2008, 09:54 AM
Neither of those models will be more reliable than the other, neither will be more accurate.

Get the one you like, they will both do very well.

If you like to hang "tacticrap" on your rifle the SOCOM probably makes that a little easier.

Are those still legal in California?

H2O MAN
March 10, 2008, 10:15 AM
If you like to hang "tacticrap" on your rifle the SOCOM probably makes that a little easier.

That's true for the SOCOM II, but not the original SOCOM 16.
Most people that buy a II end up selling the cheese grater rail
system and run the original rail free configuration.

MassMark
March 10, 2008, 11:02 AM
Amen - I bought the SOCOM-16 - no rails. In it's stock form, it's a sweet and handy carbine length boomer. I was looking for a Scout when I came across the SOCOM-16 and impulse led me to buy it - I'm glad I did. Accuracy out to 300-yards is easy, though you'll find the wide CQB blade covers the target at that range. Add a Trijicon Tripower to the rail and the world is yours. Mine is now in a Troy MCS, but will one day reside back in USGI birch, as I'd like to put a longer, (18") build in the MCS...BTW - my SOCOM-16 has a completely USGI trigger group, bolt, oprod spring and guide.

Andrewsky
March 10, 2008, 08:04 PM
Mark, my SAI bolts are marked "SA." Does that mean SAI or USGI SA?

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 06:44 AM
Even the new rifles coming out of Springfield have USGI parts in them, so when it was made isn't really much of an indicator.

But in regards to SOCOM or scout, just pick whichever you like the looks of the most. Not much difference other than the 2" or extra barrel on the scout.

Oh, and I think the front sight on the scout would be a little more well suited for longer range shooting.

Ash
March 11, 2008, 07:57 AM
Springfield marks their own bolts to look like USGI. I'm not certain, but I think their bolts (and op rods, which are also marked to look USGI) have been commercial for years.

Ash

boots
March 11, 2008, 04:12 PM
so not much difference in reliability??? i've just read that the gas system in the socom is slightly different and that it was a bit less reliable than the original and scout models...

MechAg94
March 11, 2008, 04:31 PM
I'm with Ash. I didn't think SA had used USGI parts for years and years.

TexasRifleman
March 11, 2008, 04:35 PM
I'm with Ash. I didn't think SA had used USGI parts for years and years.

That's my understanding too. I remember reading that they ran out of surplus parts many years ago.
Either ran out or the refurbing was costing more then making new, not sure which.

30Cal
March 11, 2008, 04:39 PM
They're using repro oprods, bolts, barrels and trigger housings. Most of the smaller piece parts are still USGI.

With the exception of the repro extractor, all their other parts have a really good track record.

The repro parts are marked very similarly to USGI. You can tell them apart, but not without a little knowledge.

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 04:40 PM
New rifles don't have as many USGI parts as the old ones, but they still have them.
My loaded was made in '06 and has an all USGI trigger assembly.

Ash
March 11, 2008, 04:43 PM
I wonder if those are M14 or M1 parts, though.

Ash

Andrewsky
March 11, 2008, 04:43 PM
Come to think of it, wouldn't it be hard to confuse an SAI repro bolt and a USGI bolt, one would be black and the other would be grey?

On both my SAI rifles the entire trigger assembly is HRA and both stocks and related components were also GI.

And these were made in 2007.

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 04:45 PM
They're M14 parts.

Ash
March 11, 2008, 04:50 PM
And how do you know?

Ash

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 04:52 PM
Unless I'm mistaken, although some M1 and M14 parts are interchangable, they're not identical.
Do you even like the M14?

Ash
March 11, 2008, 04:54 PM
Yes, I do. I owned an M1a, and it had an HRA barrel and original trigger group with, if I am correct, an M1 hammer and trigger. It had a SAI oprod, trigger housing, and bolt. I replaced them with CMP M14 parts.

Ash

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 04:55 PM
I just asked if you even like M1As because it seems you have a bit of a negative attitude about them.

geekWithA.45
March 11, 2008, 04:58 PM
I'm a bigger fan of the scout than I am of either of the socoms.

IMHO:

1) 18" is a better ballistics compromise than 16".
2) IIRC, Socom I used a custom gas block, early examples of which were problematic
3) Socom II's tacticrap rail adds 2.5 lbs onto what is already a heavy gun

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 05:01 PM
Another thing about the 18" barrel is you can change flash suppressors/muzzle brakes.

30Cal
March 11, 2008, 05:13 PM
Unless I'm mistaken, although some M1 and M14 parts are interchangable, they're not identical.
Do you even like the M14?

Lower sling swivel and screw, rear sight assembly, most of the trigger group parts are identical. The ones built under M14 contracts may be marked differently, but there is only one drawing.

The M14 extractor is different, but they're interchangable.

Ash
March 11, 2008, 05:18 PM
Obviously if it's marked TRW it is from the M14, but otherwise, a great many of the USGI parts on M1a's are not M14 parts but Garand parts. Of course, this may have been the case on original M14's. I don't know. I changed the parts out because I didn't want the cast SAI trigger housing. It really doesn't matter, though, as I haven't heard of the commercial housings breaking.

Ash

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 05:30 PM
Either way, whether it's an M1 or M14 part, it won't fail. In the rare instance it does, SAI will take care of it.

Andrewsky
March 11, 2008, 05:38 PM
Actually Vityaz USGI M14 parts do fail. There is nothing magical about them.

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 05:39 PM
Of course. I forgot to add the part about having to have fairies sprinkle a magic powder on them to make them last forever.

You know what I meant.

Wes Janson
March 11, 2008, 08:15 PM
Does anyone even have any real evidence that Springfield quality is any different than that of USGI? I see people paying fifteen hundred dollars for a stripped receiver, just because it was forged, and have to ask just what the point is (and yes, I know the geometry may not be quite perfect on the Springfield. But is that difference worth a thousand dollars?).

glockman19
March 11, 2008, 08:21 PM
I have a M1A loaded and my next will be a scout rifle. I not only don't like all the stuff they have on them, (Clusterrails), and it makes them very heavy.

Get a Scout and know you have the best of both worlds the ability to be effective in CQB and also be ableo to reach out to teh longer shots with accuracy.

Vityaz
March 11, 2008, 09:50 PM
Wes, a Springfield receiver will probably last for over 300,000 rounds.
A USGI is rated at about 400,000.

TexasRifleman
March 11, 2008, 10:32 PM
I see people paying fifteen hundred dollars for a stripped receiver, just because it was forged, and have to ask just what the point is

SIA isn't the only maker using cast.

Springfield, Fulton, Armscorp, Smith Enterprises (a gov contractor by the way) all use cast receivers.

Clint and Walt at Fulton, who know a little about M14's, swear that the geometry of the receiver is vastly more important for lifespan than whether it's cast or forged.

There is much more concern over using cast vs forged internal parts, though even then it's hard to show that there is actually a shorter lifespan of the cast parts.

If a forged receiver is something you simply MUST have, you will pay heavily for an LRB since they are the only people making one.
And you will wait, last time I checked, about a year and a half for one.

H2O MAN
March 11, 2008, 10:41 PM
Wes Janson Does anyone even have any real evidence that Springfield quality is any different than that of USGI?

The receiver and barrel were the best parts of my Scout Squad.
My rifle was built without any USGI parts - none.
ALL of the major reproduction parts failed within the first 250 rounds.
ALL of these parts were replaced with USGI parts under warranty.
ALL of the replacement parts turned out to be TRW :)
It took 3 trips back to Springfield and 1 parts swap by mail plus a visit to SAI's custom shop for full NM tuning.

My experience was extreme and not the norm.
Most of their rifles are very good and any good rifle will respond very well to a little NM tuning and a few upgrades.


After all was said and done I had a very reliable and extremely accurate National Match Scout.
Pictured the day before I began my adventures with SAGE.

http://www.athenswater.com/images/ebrbuild.JPG




BTW, I highly recommend SAI's custom shop for full NM tuning even if you have to supply the USGI, Chinese or SEI parts.
I think your SAI warranty remains intact if they approve of the parts and do the work.


Note: more than a few SAI receivers have proven to be out of spec.
These problem surfaces when one attempts to install a military style scope mount.

Also, Korean made M14 op-rods are currently in the market place.
Word on the street is that they are complete with counterfeit USGI marks like TRW, H&R, etc... so watch out.





One last note: ALL of my M14s are Chinese or custom SEI builds on forged Chinese receivers with USGI, Chinese and SEI parts.
3 of the 4 SEI builds are new and unfired. One has over 1600 problem free rounds fired and one had about 1500 problem
free rounds fired before I had it totally refurbished and updated. No problems, no warranty repairs, no worries :D

TexasRifleman
March 11, 2008, 10:44 PM
ALL of my M14s are Chinese or custom SEI builds on Chinese receivers

The Chinese receivers were PHENOMENAL. Wish there were lots more of them around. The Fulton guys and others think the world of them. They say the geometry of them was perfect.

H2O MAN
March 11, 2008, 10:51 PM
Quote:
ALL of my M14s are Chinese or custom SEI builds on Chinese receivers


TexasRifleman

The Chinese receivers were PHENOMENAL. Wish there were lots more of them around. The Fulton guys and others think the world of them. They say the geometry of them was perfect.

The Fulton guys got that one right :)

For those of you that want a forged receiver, but can't find a ChiCom - LRB is there for you.

MechAg94
March 11, 2008, 11:16 PM
Seems like I used to hear bad things about the Chicom receivers. What happened?

Ash
March 11, 2008, 11:33 PM
Not receivers, just most of the other parts, particularly the bolts which were often crap.

Ash

H2O MAN
March 11, 2008, 11:51 PM
Chinese receivers, op rods, chrome lined metric barrels, metric gas systems, magazines and even the trigger groups are good.
Rear sights, bolts (head space issues) are hit or miss. Front sights and muzzle devices are crude, but functional.
I happen to like the Chu wood stocks, but most do not.



My most cost effective custom builds consist of Poly Tech receivers, TRW bolts, SEI barrels, SEI gas systems and
SEI muzzle devices. I used the Chinese 1-piece forged op rod and Chinese trigger group with SEI's MAX PAC.
The rear sights are USGI, the front are SEI. Cost effective Crazy Horse SDMs :D

Vityaz
March 12, 2008, 12:09 AM
H20, what kind groups does your scout shoot?

H2O MAN
March 12, 2008, 12:26 AM
My National Match Scout would shoot about 1.75" MOA with Port NATO ball.
My MK14 Mod 1 shoots MOA (better than expected) and my Crazy Horse Mod 0 shot sub-MOA (as expected) before updates.
- all with Port and iron sights.

trbon8r
March 12, 2008, 12:40 AM
ALL of the major reproduction parts failed within the first 250 rounds.

I'm a believer in using USGI parts for an M14 build, but come on, you are saying all of the SA Inc. reproduction parts on your rifle failed in 250 rounds? I find this hard to believe.

That would mean the bolt, op rod, gas cylinder, and trigger group, would all have failed within 250 rounds? SA Inc. has some quality control issues with their repro parts, but no way do I believe it is that bad.

MassMark
March 12, 2008, 12:50 AM
I just looked at a brand spanking new SAI Loaded. This is the second one I've seen in the last year with nearly all USGI parts. Complete trigger group, oprod, bolt, spring guide were all USGI and it's literally factory fresh. The SOCOM-II also had an SAI USGI trigger group. Mine does as well and I think i got a NM with mine - it breaks so sweetly. I also have over 10,000 rounds through mine with 2 malfunctions - both mag related.

BTW - the gas systems are the same - muzzles are different. Also, Troy Industries is introducing a new end for the SOCOM-16/II and I believe SEI is as well....

30Cal
March 12, 2008, 01:05 AM
The Chinese receivers were PHENOMENAL. Wish there were lots more of them around. The Fulton guys and others think the world of them. They say the geometry of them was perfect.


You must have read something different on the Fulton FAQ than I have. They did point out some issues FWIW.

H2O MAN
March 12, 2008, 01:13 AM
Quote:
ALL of the major reproduction parts failed within the first 250 rounds.

trbon8r

I'm a believer in using USGI parts for an M14 build, but come on, you are saying all of the SA Inc. reproduction parts on your rifle failed in 250 rounds? I find this hard to believe.

That would mean the bolt, op rod, gas cylinder, and trigger group, would all have failed within 250 rounds? SA Inc. has some quality control issues with their repro parts, but no way do I believe it is that bad.

Well, I never said ALL of the reproduction parts failed... I said all of the MAJOR reproduction parts failed.
Mine was that bad, the major parts included the bolt and it's small parts, the op rod and the trigger group.
The rifle also came with what was described by SAI as a rough bore - it was that bad.


I also said: "My experience was extreme and not the norm.
Most of their rifles are very good and any good rifle will respond very well to a little NM tuning and a few upgrades."

kimberfan
March 12, 2008, 01:54 AM
how do you tell if the parts are usgi or not?

Vityaz
March 12, 2008, 03:18 AM
The markings, generally.
On the side of my trigger assembly, it's stamped "TRW." Hammer and the safety both have "HR" on them.
I believe that's the extent of my USGI parts. The rear sight, bolt and op rod are stamped "SA."

Andrewsky
March 12, 2008, 03:30 AM
Originally Posted by Vityaz
I believe that's the extent of my USGI parts.

How sad.

I bet your rifle is barely functional. How many failures have you had?

Vityaz
March 12, 2008, 03:32 AM
Not a one. :cool:

I do say Andrewsky, how many USGI parts do yours have?

Andrewsky
March 12, 2008, 03:33 AM
My God, it would take me all day to llist them.

Vityaz
March 12, 2008, 03:35 AM
Two items isn't really much of a list, ya know.

Andrewsky
March 12, 2008, 03:36 AM
*licks USGI magazine floorplate*

kimberfan
March 12, 2008, 04:38 AM
where is the manufacturer stamp on the op. rod? safety? and trigger?

H2O MAN
March 12, 2008, 09:04 AM
kimberfan where is the manufacturer stamp on the op. rod? safety? and trigger?

Go HERE (http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/)

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2008, 11:06 AM
You must have read something different on the Fulton FAQ than I have.


From Fulton's article on forged vs cast. Remember the discussion above was on forged vs cast and how geometry played a more important part in most cases.

However, that's only part of the story. More salient than some theoretical strength limit is the qualiy of the receiver: its dimensions and geometry. That's why Fulton Armory is so "down" on Fed Ord receivers. Check the Fed Ord entry in the FAQ.

Correspondingly, that's why Fulton Armory is so "up" on our own Fulton Armory M14 and the Chinese receivers; wonderful geometry.

If you enjoyed reading about "yet another M1A question...and yes, i did use the search function first..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!