Why M1A SOCOM/Scout?

[Bronx]

Gents, question for you.

I've been looking at Springfield's offerings.......Why would anyone want a 10-12 pound assault weapon built around a long range round ( .308)? Seems awfully heavy to lug around.

Isn't such a short barrel 18" - 20" silly for a .308?

Considering that you can get a .308 bolt action at 6-7#'s and shoot from a standoff range where accurate fire versus rapid is effective......why degrade the projectiles performance with a shorter barrel, all the while adding significant weight (ammo and action) when their are lighter higher capacity weapons that are designed for closer range engagement?

I just don't understand the rationale behind a light & fast assault weapon configuration for a relatively heavy longer range projectile.

If I was to buy an M-14 I get it with a long barrel. Then again with the way I'd think I'd employ it, I'd shed the 5 or so pounds that semi-auto and large magazines bring to the equation and stick with a bolt.

I'd like it that guys with real world combat experience & training sound off on this.

High cap magazines, short barrels, heavy weight to bear, and long range round doesn't add up in my mind.

Espouse some knowledge for a noob.

 

[Welding Rod]

I know guys around here who like the shorter versions for woods hunting.

I know a couple Vietnam era vets who like to hunt it for nostalgic reasons.

Springfield Armory list the Socom weight at 9.3 pounds... about the same as a Ruger Standard standard action bolt gun with optic. It can drop a little more weight by removing the scout rail.

BTW the Socom barrel is only 16.25".

Its just a good gun. Reliable, generous sight radius, open top action, adequate cartridge power, good firepower, great balance as long as a "scout" optic is not used, and they usually have a cleaner trigger break than many commercial bolt guns.

They are fun to shoot. Why would there be the need for any other reason to make or buy one?

 

[Frankl03]

I enjoy shooting military type rifles. M1a is a civilian semi auto copy/clone of the military version. Military rifles are not always the most accurate. I have an M1a loaded. It has the 22 inch stainless barrel. Fun gun to shoot. The rifle has character.

I have a 20 inch bolt rifle that I'm more accurate with.

 

[Cosmoline]

why degrade the projectiles performance with a shorter barrel

The .308/7.62 NATO is designed to work well with an 18" or 20" barrel. IIRC the full size M14 only has a 22" barrel.

The weight offsets the recoil, though obviously this isn't an easy day hike rifle.

I'm not sure why people think about the .308 as a special "long range" cartridge. It's a standard high power rifle round that approximates the ballistics of .30'06 ball and operates well out of automatic actions. It has more power at longer ranges than an intermediate cartridge, but is also perfectly suited for up close use.

 

[CoRoMo]

...accurate fire versus rapid...

What makes you think the two can't be found in the same package?

It's obvious that the M1A isn't made for the uses you'd put it to. No problem. It's made perfectly for those of us who'd use it for our intended purposes. Comparing a battle rifle to a <7lb. hunting rifle is like contrasting the differences between a jet engine and a potato, IMO.

 

[Bronx]

What makes you think the two can't be found in the same package?

Where did I imply that?

Why has the military adapted the 5.56? Light weight and accurate over long ranges with pretty good killing power, correct? Now 6.8 is a military contender as well right? A 6.8 platform is lighter than a .308 yet has more knock down power than 5.56, isn't that correct?

Seems that based on the information I have available that the military has been striving for a long time to deploy rifles that are light, high capacity, accurate over long range and are not 30 caliber.

It's obvious that the M1A isn't made for the uses you'd put it to. No problem. It's made perfectly for those of us who'd use it for our intended purposes.

What purposes does an M1A excel at that can not be done better by lighter more recent designs?

Comparing a battle rifle to a <7lb. hunting rifle is like contrasting the differences between a jet engine and a potato, IMO.

A 1903 is a "Battle Rifle". Bolt action.

M-14 is the final product of the "Battle Rifle" design philosophy right?

The requirements of modern warfare are for a light weight accurate high capacity rifle, at least that is what is readily apparent to me.

It's not apples and oranges because my question isn't about semi versus bolt.

A better analogy is why would you put a freight locomotive prime mover in a tractor trailer? Highly inefficient.

The M1A design with all the trappings of the modern day assault weapon appears contradictory and anachronistic. Short barrel (16.5") , and boat anchor heavy compared to modern infantry rifles.

Thanks,

Martin

 

[Bronx]

The .308/7.62 NATO is designed to work well with an 18" or 20" barrel. IIRC the full size M14 only has a 22" barrel.

The weight offsets the recoil, though obviously this isn't an easy day hike rifle.

I'm not sure why people think about the .308 as a special "long range" cartridge. It's a standard high power rifle round that approximates the ballistics of .30'06 ball and operates well out of automatic actions. It has more power at longer ranges than an intermediate cartridge, but is also perfectly suited for up close use.

Thanks for the added info, I don't think of the .308 as a special cartridge, but it is very capable from fairly great distances. Would you say that modern infantry designs are far more suitable than the M1a, covering the spectrum from up close and intermediate ranges?

 

[Bronx]

P.S. I'm not trying to pot-stir with this. I'm just wondering what I'm missing here. What real roll does the M1A fill better than anything else available? If I want to have .30 cal fun I use my cheap chinese AK I bought in 1996.

 

[1KPerDay]

It's way cooler than anything else, except the Garand.

18-20" barrels don't work for .308? Better not tell that to the hunting rifle guys...

 

[LoneStarWings]

Hey, the bottom line is that if you don't like it, don't buy it. By all means get what you like. But, just for grins I'll argue:


A scout doesn't weight 12 lbs. My M1A Scout weighs 8.5 lbs unloaded (synthetic stock, magazine removed, vortex flash hider in place of muzzle brake). This is only a pound or two heavier (25% at most) than a 16" 5.56 ar-15, and ligher than most 7.62x51 AR platforms. In exchange for that weight, you get a good bit more stopping power and anti-material capability than the 5.56.

I didn't buy mine as any kind of combat patrol assault mall ninja rifle, I bought mine as a just "a rifle" that can do everything pretty well: hunt large game, shoot out to 500+ yards with good power, have good enough accuracy for target shooting (< 2 MOA), be somewhat handy, have good iron sights, and have the ability to scope if i want it.

If you just want a military GI-issue patrol rifle, then yeah, get an AR-15. That's not really what an M1A is all about. It's a DMR rifle in the military now, and that's what it's good at.

Regarding barrel length: 18" is not silly for .308. You only lose about 100fps (2500 vs 2600fps) over a 22" barrel, a less than 5% reduction in velocity. That might take your range down from 900 to 800 yards. It's worth it for the weight and length reduction, in my opinion. There are plenty of 18" and shorter FAL's and 308-AR's too.

Why use 2 rifles (a bolt and an AR/AK) when one could suffice? That's where an 18" barreled M1A is nice; a jack of all trades, master of none sort of application. If you're just one dude with one gun, that's a nice kind of rifle to have.

 

[Candiru]

Why use 2 rifles (a bolt and an AR/AK) when one could suffice? That's where an 18" barreled M1A is nice; a jack of all trades, master of none sort of application. If you're just one dude with one gun, that's a nice kind of rifle to have.

Well put. This is my reason for choosing an M14-style rifle. It's a do-it-all rifle. You can get rifles that are lighter, more accurate, have better iron sights, function more reliably, or are faster and easier to use for CQB-style shooting--but there's nothing that beats the M14 in all those categories at the same time.

Maybe when the SCAR-H comes out I'll have to revisit these words with a fork and knife. But even then, Garand pattern rifles have quite a bit going for them that no recent design has yet managed to replace.

 

[stuckinsocal]

Also, you have to look at the intended purpose of the rifle. Just as a 10 in. AR-15 isn't a long range gun, the 16-18 inch M14 isn't a 1000 yard gun. It wasn't designed as such. It was designed to give more power than the 5.56 at closer ranges and have a relatively light and short rifle. Quite a few police agencies use a 16-18 in. M14 because it's not significantly heavier or longer than an AR-15 and provides substantially more power. Whether or not that power is needed or if the 5.56 is enough is a different debate, but the more powerful round is the reason police agencies use them.

It's also a great all-round use rifle. It makes a good truck gun, hunting rifle, police patrol rifle, self defense rifle (outside of a house),military DMR, and a fun target/plinking gun if you can afford to feed it.

 

[Cosmoline]

Would you say that modern infantry designs are far more suitable than the M1a, covering the spectrum from up close and intermediate ranges?

All platforms are about tradeoffs. The AR and other platforms designed around an intermediate round trade off a little ft. lbs. and caliber size for lighter weight and more ammunition. The M-14 and related platforms trade off less size and power but weigh more and have heavier ammo. So it depends on whether you think you're going to need a heftier punch and whether that's worth the price you'll pay in capacity and weight. 7.62 NATO ball has a very good reputation as a manstopper even without expanding rounds, so if you're going to be dealing with crazies who can shrug off a 5.56 then maybe it's worth the trade. It also gives you a notch more power at longer range.

On the down side, the M-14/M-1A family has always suffered as a "jack of all trades, master of none." But I can sure see why people love them. The design is nearly flawless and it's got the power. And the fact is you *could* do with that one platform what it takes a gun case full of firearms to do otherwise.

 

[Bronx]

use a 16-18 in. M14 because it's not significantly heavier or longer than an AR-15 and provides substantially more power.

It's also a great all-round use rifle. It makes a good truck gun, hunting rifle, police patrol rifle, self defense rifle (outside of a house),military DMR, and a fun target/plinking gun if you can afford to feed it.

So, if you keep all the "Tacticool" stuff off of it and stick with the medium length barrels, =/>18", you got essentially a harder hitting all purpose rifle than an AR-15 type?

That's about the question I'm trying to answer for myself. What stuff would/do you avoid to keep the weight down?

 

[Bronx]

It's way cooler than anything else, except the Garand.

18-20" barrels don't work for .308? Better not tell that to the hunting rifle guys...

My bust on that, I was referring to the 16.5".......

 

[stubbicatt]

Just 'cuz your car will do 180 mph doesn't mean you have to drive that fast, no?

The 308 is not a "long range" cartridge, tho I've shot mine to 1200 yards or so before with pretty good accuracy! It is generally a bit more than intermediate range, but it also excels at shorter ranges.

The SOCOM is a neat rifle in its own right. For distances out to about 400 yards it is a great choice. The brake makes followup shots much easier.

I guess if folks don't want one they will leave more for me!

 

[jbech123]

I'm not sure why people think about the .308 as a special "long range" cartridge.

Probably becuase both the Army and Marines use them as their main sniper platform? I'm not saying there aren't better long range rounds out there, but thinking of the .308 as a long range cartridge is not all that preposterous when you consider our military and most police agencies use it for that purpose.

 

[Bronx]

Probably becuase both the Army and Marines use them as their main sniper platform? I'm not saying there aren't better long range rounds out there, but thinking of the .308 as a long range cartridge is not all that preposterous when you consider our military and most police agencies use it for that purpose.

That is what I was thinking.

 

[Cosmoline]

They've used it as a full powered rifle round, which certainly can include sniping. But its effective range is on par with all the other .30 caliber high powered rifle cartridges. As a true long range round it has serious limitations, and there are much better cartridges for long range shooting. Or long range sniping for that matter. The 7.62/.308's big advantage is that it's so popular and benefits from economies of scale. Even a small police department can afford a .308 rifle, mount a scope on it and buy very nice .308 rounds with known and well-established ballistic trajectories mapped out. Move up to a .338 Lapua or a .50 BMG and matters get a lot more complicated and expensive. The actual need for true long range sniping is very limited, so why bother with it?

 

[Bronx]

Just 'cuz your car will do 180 mph doesn't mean you have to drive that fast, no?

The brake makes followup shots much easier.

Cars.......well..............

What muzzle brake do you speak of?

If I was to get one I'd go with the "Scout Squad" probably.

 

[Al Thompson]

I have the Scout and like it. One somewhat overlooked advantage is that the Scout is about the same length as a M16A1, Remington 870 Police or a .30-30 - but with 20 rounds of .308 smack on tap.



I suspect if you multiplied the FPE times the ammo on board of all the firearms mentioned, that 20 rounds of .308 would lead the pack.



1 yard to 1,000 yards, it's hard to beat the chunky little critter.

 

[Bronx]

I have the Scout and like it. One somewhat overlooked advantage is that the Scout is about the same length as a M16A1, Remington 870 Police or a .30-30 - but with 20 rounds of .308 smack on tap.



I suspect if you multiplied the FPE times the ammo on board of all the firearms mentioned, that 20 rounds of .308 would lead the pack.



1 yard to 1,000 yards, it's hard to beat the chunky little critter.

Are they southpaw friendly?

If so I guess I gotta get my mitts on one and cop a feel!

 

[ArmedBear]

The SOCOM is a heavy gun, loses a LOT of velocity vs. the .308's design intent, and is really loud.

Springfield has to build it, because they have to maximize their offerings in niche markets.

But I don't have to buy it.

I do want an M1A, though.

 

[navajo]

short

Why?
I have owned 7 M-1 As including a Squad/Scout.
Its the only semi auto I trust completely. Never had a malfunction with one. Not one. Ever. Thousands of rounds, surplus, factory new and reloads. Not one malfunction.
Sold the S/S to a fedral LEO who wanted more power in a small package than his M-4 had.

 

[Gunfighter123]

Yes , the SOCOM is LOUD -- but , what .308 isn't.

With the muzzle brake/compinsator on it -- it is the softest recoiling .308 I have ever owned and I've owned/own HK91s , full size M1As , Beretta BM59s , FN FALs , etc. etc.

With the SOCOM , you are getting the max power in the min. size ---- from a rest , with good ammo -- I can hit a head/basketball at 200 yards with iron sights with no problem.

Bronx stated

I just don't understand the rationale behind a light & fast assault weapon configuration for a relatively heavy longer range projectile.

It is a fact that the .308 will get thru objects that the .223s can't --- stove , fridge , steel doors , or a older car door --- I will take a .308 in a quick handleing rifle over my Colt AR anyday and everytime !!!