ar-10 vs m1a1


PDA






jgo296
March 16, 2008, 01:18 AM
I think its time to get an assault rifle but i want it to be all purpous as well.
I think the 308 serves this perfectly
i would like to here arguments from both sides on which is better.

If you enjoyed reading about "ar-10 vs m1a1" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LB7_Driver
March 16, 2008, 01:35 AM
Both are good.

The AR is an easier platform to make (manufacture) accurately, and will maintain its accuracy with less fuss.

Magazines cost about the same for each, unless you're using one of the AR variants that uses FAL mags. FAL mags are cheap, though there have been issues with those AR variants. Keep your eyes open for new information about that.

- The Armalite AR-10 uses modified M1a mags
- The DPMS LR-308 and the Stoner SR-25 both use the same mags
- I think the RRA variant uses FAL mags.

Zak Smith
March 16, 2008, 02:14 AM
On average:

You can make an accurate M14, but it will cost a lot.

You can make a reliable "AR-10" but it will cost a lot, in time or money.

geojap
March 16, 2008, 11:53 AM
I'd buy the Abrams tank. It makes quite a statement. Now getting one from General Dynamics might be challenging... :neener:

H2O MAN
March 16, 2008, 12:18 PM
Both platforms are very good in there own way.

I like 5.56 NATO from the AR platform and 7.62 NATO from the M14 platform.
I sold my ArmaLite AR-10A4 SPR to help fund another M14 build and picked up a Colt LE 6920.

MK14 SEI Mod 1 with a 25 round mag.
http://www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod1-small.jpg

Buzzbox
March 16, 2008, 12:38 PM
I think its time to get an assault rifle but i want it to be all purpous as well.

As the saying goes "Jack of all trades, master of none." The same things desireable in an "assault rifle" are not the same as a precision rifle, and so on. You're going to end up with more than one rifle, face it.

As for the AR-10 versus the M-14, I used to own an AR-10t. While it was accurate, it was not reliable. I find the M14 to be more robust, plenty accurate, and overall the easier rifle to own.

MachIVshooter
March 16, 2008, 01:41 PM
You can make a reliable "AR-10" but it will cost a lot, in time or money

Or you can buy an Armalite. I bought mine in 2005 and had feeding issues. But since I upgraded to the second gen mags last year, no problems at all.

The converted M1A mags with the spring loaded plunger in the follower for the bolt stop were problematic; the follower bound up against the walls of the mag. But the gen II mags are like AR-15 mags, with a channel down the back for the bolt stop tang to ride in. Upgrading takes only changing out the bolt stop, which are about $40 IIRC. New production AR-10's are already updated. The gen II mags are also 25 rounders, which is a big plus for going Armalite IMO.

navajo
March 16, 2008, 04:19 PM
I have owned seven SAI M1As. Still have my first one.
Many thousands of rounds. Surplus, hand loads and commercial.
Not one malfunction. Ever. Not one broken part. Ever.
I currently own three AR10s. After a few hundred rounds, two malfunctions. One mag related, had too much phosphate inside. Haven't figured out the second one yet but it was a 5 second fix.
The AR 10 is more accurate out of the box because of the design.
I managed to put 20 rounds in the same hole with the full length rifle from a very well bagged rest.

I prefer the M1A because I like wood and steel. In a pinch I would grab my AR 10 carbine. Its short and handy and bang on at 300 yds.

BTW, the current AR 10 mag is not an M-14 mag, its a new design that looks like an M-14 mag. The early mags were modified M-14 mags. Armalite used them because of the ban. They had to use what was already made and could not make a new "high capacity" mag. They installed a spring loaded plunger at the rear of the follower to work the bolt stop and added a cut to the mag body at the rear top to accomodate the plunger. The new mags do not have the plunger.

FAL mags work well in FALs, not so well in rotating bolt platforms.

Seafarer12
March 16, 2008, 04:23 PM
Both platforms are very good in there own way.

I like 5.56 NATO from the AR platform and 7.62 NATO from the M14 platform.
I sold my ArmaLite AR-10A4 SPR to help fund another M14 build and picked up a Colt LE 6920.

MK14 SEI Mod 1 with a 25 round mag.


Man that things got all the tacticool junk on it. M14's aren't bad I would just rather have an FAL.

rbernie
March 16, 2008, 08:10 PM
I keep hearing about these unreliable AR10s from people who's opinions I trust (and so I believe their statements), but I've not had either of mine go down yet.

Admittedly, I don't shoot them smokin' hot, but they DO get shot. They just work; no FTF or FTE in over a thousand rounds since I last changed their barrels. I just feed 'em cheap plinking loads (R-P brass with 45gr Varget and CoreLokt 150gr bullets that I bought on sale) and they keep banging away.

Dunno. Maybe I'm lucky. I did upgrade both of them to the new-style Armalite bolt catch, but I use them with a mix of older and new-production magazines with equal success.

At this point, I've got little incentive to get into the M14/M1A platform since my AR10s seem to be working well enough.

If I want a knock-around 308 for field abuse, I'll grab one of my Saigas or maybe a FAL. Every now and again, I'll grab one of the CETMEs to remind myself why I prefer the FAL or Saiga. If I want to punch holes as close together as possible, I'll bring the AR10.

There is no doubt in my mind that I prefer a true pistol-grip stock configuration.

Professor Gun
March 16, 2008, 08:31 PM
I have an M1A and between my sons and I we have three Armalite AR-10s. All have been great rifles. My M1A is more accurate than the AR-10s but it has been tuned. We have had no reliability issues with the AR-10s; we use them primarily for hunting deer.

Either way you go, I think you will have a nice rifle. Get the one that seems to fit you best and you will be happy.

amprecon
March 16, 2008, 08:50 PM
I personally do not like the direct gas impingement system and prefer a gas piston system. I also prefer the traditional pistol grips rather than the protruding pistol grips. I also like direct access to the bolt group for a quick visual of what's going on in the innards in the event of a malf./misfeed/jam etc., etc.
But like I said, these are my personal preferences.

chauncey
March 16, 2008, 10:38 PM
I'm no fan of the AR's gas system. it puts a lot of garbage the last place I'd want it. I feel the M1A's operating system is far more reliable and much easier to clean. The AR platform does have the edge on ergonomics, and depending on who you ask, an edge on accuracy.

it also bothers me that the various manufacturer's can't seem to agree on a common magazine system. I'd hate to be the owner looking for some weird magazine made by some manufacturer that's no longer in business or has discontinued magazine production, or has been banned from magazine production.

in spite of ridiculous prices, at least M14 magazines are readily available, and will be, long after DPMS or Armalite or whoever has stopped producing mags for their AR10 or whatnot.

Zak Smith
March 16, 2008, 11:03 PM
MachIVshooter, the irony is that most of those were ArmaLites. My experience with these is seeing people attempt to campaign them in 3Gun competition since about 2003. I've posted about this before, and said the same thing. More of them have had problems, by a wide margin, than those that have run well. There are certainly some that do work, but I wouldn't put money on an AR-10's reliability based on the the averages..

jgo296
March 16, 2008, 11:23 PM
ok so what im gathering here is that the ar-10 is more accurate but the m1a1 is more reliable
id say that reliability would come before perfect accuracy for me but how bad are we talking here just for comparison sake how what is the furthest distance a deer could be taken with each

TIMC
March 16, 2008, 11:37 PM
My AR-10 has been 100% reliable from day one. The rifle has also been more accurate than the shooter but I have succesfully taken game on several occasions at ranges in excess of 250 yards with little effort, by the way mine is one of those terrible Bushmaster AR-10's you see people giving "I heard" bad stories about. As an owner I can say hogwash to all the "I heard" stories and I love mine.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v369/timc/BushmasterAR10smile-1.jpg

My M1A has also been 100% reliable from day one. Mine is the M-21 version and it will put 1/2" groups at 100 yards. While it is a very fine rifle I think of it more as a bench rest rifle because of it's weight but I have hunted with it and it will do the job.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v369/timc/M1Aafterrangetrip.jpg

For hunting I prefer the AR-10, it is a light weight rifle that is fairly easy to move around in tight areas and makes one heck of a pig hunting rifle.

Magnuumpwr
March 17, 2008, 12:27 AM
Don't own an M-14, opted for a DPMS LR308 to be able to change out uppers in the near future. Currently have a 20", want to get a 16" and a 24". Just like having readily available, quick options, unlike with the M-14.

velocette
March 17, 2008, 01:23 AM
I have a DPMS LR 308B that has been totally reliable, never a failure of any sort, it is very accurate, consistently sub moa with decent ammo. Mags are $28.00 each on gunbroker. It will fire safely almost any commercial or military surplus ammo. Earlier designs from other manufacturers did have functioning problems, mostly with magazines.
The m14, (and it's forefather the M1 Garand) while a fine battle rifle, should not be fed many types of commercial ammo or used with the slow burning gunpowders generally employed with heavier bullets. They can be modified to use these bullets & be extremely accurate but at significant expense. They are also notoriously hard on brass. Two or three reloadings is all you normally get from your brass.
Accessories are less common and expensive when compared to an AR type rifle, particularly optics and optic mounts. (however the battle sights on an M14 are excellent)
Something to remember, that the M1 / M14 designs are almost 80 years old while the AR series is perhaps 40.
Finally, the M14s of today are made of parts coming from all over the world including China with attendant quality questions. The days of Springfield assembling their m14s from surplus GI parts are long gone.

In the end, you should actually buy one of each. An M1, an M14 and an LR 308, you can then enjoy life!

Roger

madcratebuilder
March 17, 2008, 09:41 AM
Finally, the M14s of today are made of parts coming from all over the world including China with attendant quality questions. The days of Springfield assembling their m14s from surplus GI parts are long gone.
SA still has a stash of usgi parts. I have only had my hands on about a half dozen M1A's. All had usgi trigger assembles, a 50/50 mix on the flash suppressors, two had usgi bolts. three with usgi barrels, mine has a six groove Wilson NM (shipped as standard) I know small parts are from WMI, a good quality import. I well admit that there are a few funky SA out there that have needed repeated trips back to SA for repair, but they do it for free.
A friend had problems with the extractor popping out on two different bolts. He asked for and got a usgi bolt.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d37/madcratebuilder/m1a-1.jpg

I still want to add an AR-10 to my collection, just because.

TIMC, two very nice rifles!

If you enjoyed reading about "ar-10 vs m1a1" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!