Disappointing experience with a SOCOM II


PDA






philpost
June 5, 2011, 11:15 AM
After seeing the SOCOM II on TV, I was excited to finally get to pick one up. That quickly changed to disappointment because of it's weight, the fact that I found it way off-balance, and the lack of a comfortable hand hold due to the rails. I didn't get to shoot it, but the terrible ergonomics (IMHO) turned me off. Has anyone had a different experience with it, or am I missing something?

If you enjoyed reading about "Disappointing experience with a SOCOM II" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
kmcintosh78
June 5, 2011, 11:39 AM
Did you purchase it?

I have shot them and love it.

Zerodefect
June 5, 2011, 11:50 AM
I prefer the AR10 type rifles in that price range instead.
LMT, Larue, Armalight etc.

The rail space that isn't filled is best covered up wiht Magpul XTM covers and Gear Sector hand stops. Those will help any railed rifle feel alot better. And you can stipple the Magpul covers as needed.

cottonmouth
June 5, 2011, 12:18 PM
I got rid of the rails on my SOCOM II, it's not a long range rifle and the sight are fine for up close work. It balances fine to me without the rails, still heavy but it's an M1A not an AR.

J.B.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/cottonmouth_/IMG_2375.jpg

Izzy77
June 5, 2011, 12:50 PM
I think people who think the M-14/M1a's are bulky never handled an FAL. ;)

Full size for me.

Dain Bramage
June 5, 2011, 01:55 PM
I have to agree with you, Philpost. My only experience with the SOCOM II is fondling, but I was put off by the weight and imbalance.

I've fired my friend's FAL, and while it is a brick, at least it's a better balanced brick.

I guess I should try an AR-10 some day.

helotaxi
June 5, 2011, 02:39 PM
I actually liked the weight/balance of the version that I fondled without the rails. No use for the rails, personally.

philpost
June 5, 2011, 05:08 PM
No, I didn't buy it - it was more of a scouting expedition for my next must-have that I could start saving for. The weight was not so much of an issue as was the balance. I also checked out a standard model (w/synthetic stock), and found it preferable. I'll also be looking into the Scout model.

General Geoff
June 5, 2011, 05:16 PM
I also checked out a standard model (w/synthetic stock), and found it preferable.
The only way to fly with the M14 platform, IMO, is the full length barrel (22").

Jeremy2171
June 5, 2011, 06:18 PM
Here is my new favorite......

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff36/jeremy2171/M1A/m1a006.jpg

bbuddtec
June 5, 2011, 07:15 PM
Nice one, JB, and proof positive :)

and a nice AR'ed one, Jeremy ;)

jeepguy
June 5, 2011, 09:07 PM
i have an older 18" bush model & socom 16 (whithout the rails) and they ballance well. the socom 2 with the rails, has all that extra weight hanging off the front, making the rifle very front heavy. my bush rifle had excellent balance before i put an ultimak rail on it, & now it is way to front heavy. so im thinking about taking it off, so it balances better. i think its better to just put a traditional scope mount over the receiver, or use the forward scout mount that comes with the scout/squad & socom. i don't care for the balance of the full size 22" m1a/m14 rifles either, i feel like their is just to much weight up front.

philpost
June 5, 2011, 10:19 PM
the socom 2 with the rails, has all that extra weight hanging off the front, making the rifle very front heavy.
Yes, exactly. Also, if it feels front heavy with nothing on it, I can only imagine what it would feel like with a scope/laser/light on it.

Z-Michigan
June 5, 2011, 10:45 PM
I think people who think the M-14/M1a's are bulky never handled an FAL.

Full size for me.

I own and shoot both and find the FAL much handier. YMMV.

If you enjoyed reading about "Disappointing experience with a SOCOM II" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!