Is an M1A Overkill for a New Shooter
- Thread starter oates
- Start date
- Status
Let's say you had never driven before and if you bought the Indy car you could only afford the gas to take five practice laps per year, but if you bought the Pinto, you could afford to take 100 practice laps per year, and after a year you could afford to buy the Indy car to practice in, having already mastered the basics.
I think that's a more apt analogy.
Sure, to master an M1A you have to shoot an M1A, but you first can master the basics of shooting for cheap and then adapt them slightly to the rifle you really want. Saving an extra $300 (the price of a 10/22 and a years supply of ammo) is not a big deal if your going to save up $2000 for the M1A and ammo.
No offense, but that is asinine.
And if he's a new shooter with no instruction, it'll likely be a good way to develop a flinch. The fact that the 10/22 (or most any other .22 for that matter) is light, has no recoil, and has a single stage trigger makes it a good learning platform. Best to build good habits from the ground up. Bad habits are tough to break, and most are caused by the fact that new shooters tend to anticipate the recoil and/or noise. The .22 would be a much better learning platform.
Financially, the .22lr makes more sense as well. Shooting fundamentals are the same on any rifle, and they take trigger time to learn. For folks that are not made out of money, a .22lr makes boucoup more sense.
Get the M1A, but get a decent used .22 to learn the basics with.
Jason
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
There are plenty of valid arguments against the M1A for a first time rifle that aren't financial.
They need more maintenance than an AR15 if you intend to use them as a target rifle, they're nowhere near as modular, they certainly can't take multiple uppers.
The recoil impulse is heavier than a .223 and certainly more than a .22 LR.
However, unless you're lucky enough to have a parent who put you into smallbore rifle competition as a child, no one buys a .22 for their first gun.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
H20man's bias is showing.
a ruger 10-22 with tech sights, five magazines and a thousand rounds of good ammo costs just over a third what a bone stock m-1a costs without ammo or additional magazines.
get the 10-22, first.
you can learn on an m-14, but it will be much more difficult. Much, much more difficult.
a ruger 10-22 with tech sights, five magazines and a thousand rounds of good ammo costs just over a third what a bone stock m-1a costs without ammo or additional magazines.
get the 10-22, first.
you can learn on an m-14, but it will be much more difficult. Much, much more difficult.
Not in the least.
I had a sweet stainless 10/22 with the tech sights and ended up trading it for a case of
Portuguese 7.62 x 51 NATO surplus ammo because I realized I really didn't need the 22lr.
I then went on to build up two more M14s.
my rifles as i purchased them
1. bm m4 carbine
2. sa m1a
3. vz58 7.62x39
3. cz452 fs .22lr
first time at the range no instruction, pretty much learned on my own, but my very first shot gave me a smile like no other rifle i shot. let me help you consider one
1. bm m4 carbine
2. sa m1a
3. vz58 7.62x39
3. cz452 fs .22lr
first time at the range no instruction, pretty much learned on my own, but my very first shot gave me a smile like no other rifle i shot. let me help you consider one
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I understand that you might not need the .22LR, but you're not buying a first gun. the OP is.
what was your first rifle? Mine was a remington 514, which i still have. I graduated to a mini-14, and then an Ar-15, an m-1a and then everything from enfields to hand built bolt guns. The reason i enjoy shooting today is my dad knew enough to start me out on something fun and easy to shoot.
I appreciate your enthusiasm for your chosen platform, but I don't think an m-1A is the answer here.
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
I guess you didn't watch the news while it was going on in '92? There were enough of them that it was reported. One is enough, especially if that ONE happens to be you. The action type of the firearm is insignificant. Get the facts indeed!
Back to the original poster:
The Springfield rifles are 'good enough.' M14 fanatics are usually driven to find rifles made with USGI parts and receivers, or new Smith Enterprises receivers. A Springfield will suffice for the shooting that 95% of us will ever do. For a first rifle.. it will be excellent. I will say that you should get the full size model... not the shortened scout. I am not a M14/M1A expert, I know just enough to know that I don't have the discretionary cash to build a top shelf gun yet.
If I may ask... is spending between .50 and 1.00 per shot going to be prohibitive to you?
The very 1st rifle that I learned to shoot back in Indiana was the Garand.
The very first rifle that I purchased was a DAEWOO K1A1.
It took me a few decades to return to the .30 caliber rifle.
With proper training, the M14 is easily appropriate to any 1st time shooter.
Hell, I taught my girlfriend to shoot her very 1st hand gun... the Glock 21.
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
Here is a source for ammo, should you choose the M1A.
http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=8644
http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=8644
earplug
Member
I was a ex Army, single guy with cash in my pocket, when I bought my M1A in 1978. I handloaded for it and it still was a pain for me to shoot. Finding a decent range, I don't like prone or sitting, the cost of magazines and the comparrisons with easy to shoot off the rack scoped hunting rifles that shot better. I sold the M1A and don't regret it. Lots of other rifles that are more bang for the buck. Accuracy, handyness and fun.
Excellent!
Aim Surplus has a bunch of German NATO surplus with the MEN head stamp.
Selling for about $420.00 per 1000. I doubt it will ever be less expensive...
If only I purchased a truck load when Port was $135.00 per 1000 delivered :banghead:
longdayjake
Member
If I were you I would not hesitate to buy an m1a or an m1. Whether you start with one or not you will eventually want both. Just get them now and then worry about what you are going to learn on later. They may not always be as available as they are now. Keep in mind that the scout version cannot cycle or shoot the heavy 175 grain bullets. You will be limited to shooting 150 grainers accurately. The 168's don't shoot very well but they work.
longdayjake
Member
Was she professional enough?
Quote:
Hell, I taught my girlfriend to shoot her very 1st hand gun... the Glock 21.
Well, she didn't flinch and she hit what she aimed at. Professional enough for a 1st timer.
The funny thing is that she didn't like the AR I had here try out that same day...
Hell, I taught my girlfriend to shoot her very 1st hand gun... the Glock 21.
Well, she didn't flinch and she hit what she aimed at. Professional enough for a 1st timer.
The funny thing is that she didn't like the AR I had here try out that same day...
MarcusWendt
Member
No it's not overkill, in fact it's perfect. It's a classic rifle in a very common caliber and a great rifle. I couldn't think of a better platform to start on.
longdayjake
Member
It was meant to be an inside joke. You need to watch the video of the DEA Agent shooting himself and then you will get it. Do a youtube search for it.
- Status