M1A SOCOM 16 range question(s)

Anyone who tells you it's only a 100 yard rifle has no idea how to shoot, or is applying entirely inappropriate standards.

It is a (semi) military carbine (sort of) that fits into pretty much the same niche as a combat AR-15 or AK. Out to 300 yds it should not be impossible for you to hit a man-sized target if you have a decent understanding of what you're doing. And that's the point of the thing. Engaging human-sized targets at the distances most modern "combat" happens. If you're hoping to shoot precision matches, or plink groundhogs, this isn't the gun for that.

Some form of low-magnification optic can help you, of course, thought the M14/M1A platform is not the easiest to scope.

Barrel length does not affect accuracy except that it will typically reduce the sight radius and decrease the shooters ability to aim the rifle as accurately.

I would say that you should be able to hit a man sized target within 500yd. Even with the short barrel, .308 should still have plenty of energy at that range. Realistically, in a combat situation, your ability to acquire and identify a target is the range-limiting factor without optics.

checkmyswag,

I have heard a lot of people talk a lot trash about the so called accuracy of the SOCOM 16. You posted my exact questions about accuracy vs distance of this rifle but, I agree with what sam1911 posted. Personally, I think people are trying to compare a SOCOM 16 to a M1A Super Match and I think that is not realistic.

With the proper fundamentals of marksmanship you should be able to hit a man size target out to 300m. Now, with 400m - 500m you may need some type of optic with magnification but, it still boils down to fundamentals IMO.

Personally, I think this rifle will be great to 300m with irons and that is why I want this rifle. I am not looking to shoot out to 500m or more consistently and all I really want to do with this rifle is put a Ultimak M8 rail and mount a Eotech 517.

In my experiences shooting the SOCOM 16, the giant, thick Tritium front sight post makes it difficult to reliably aim for & hit the vital zones of a B27 target when you get out to 300. You're adding a much larger potential for aiming error on top of ammo inconsistency and a rifle that is, per SAI, in-spec at 2-4 MOA.

Switching to a standard front sight or a 0.62 NM sight changes things drastically.

YMMV...

Met a guy who ran a DPMS LR-308 with a 16" barrel at Whittington out to 1,000 yards. Hit like 8 out of 10 times on steel.

boricua9mm,

Do you think switching out the thick front sight post affect the speed of acquiring your targets at closer ranges being that this weapon is more of a "CQB" system. I agree that switching to a thinner blade would help with running irons but do you think running a eotech sight still accomplish being able to hit accurately at 300m and under?

Mine is a 4 MOA gun with match ammo.

I will be shimming the gas cylinder shortly and see it that helps.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=15qj032UJ1I 18 inch bolt a 1k

The big issue with M1A's seems to be that stock, which can be very loose fitting. AFAIK there's nothing in particular about the SOCOM which would make it less inherently accurate. I believe the sights may be designed for closer range shooting? But they can be swapped out for match sights.

boricua9mm,

Do you think switching out the thick front sight post affect the speed of acquiring your targets at closer ranges being that this weapon is more of a "CQB" system. I agree that switching to a thinner blade would help with running irons but do you think running a eotech sight still accomplish being able to hit accurately at 300m and under?

Click to expand...

In theory, the smaller front sight will be slower to acquire, but you've also got a shortened sight radius which makes the front blade appear larger than it normally would on a full sized rifle. Personally, I prefer small apertures and finer front sight blades, but that's in the daytime. Of course tritium irons or illuminated optics like a red dot or a reflex type would be faster and more effective in the dark.

On the subject of optics, I personally think that for a SOCOM the best solution is to get an Aimpoint H1/T1 as low as possible on the rail. The EoTech just sits way too high b/c it was designed for the inline buttstock and low rail height attributes of the AR15. If you sue one on an M1A, you're going to have a chin weld or else you'll need to find a good cheek rest or even a completely different stock.

Again, those are just my opinions based on my experiences.

boricua9mm said:

In theory, the smaller front sight will be slower to acquire, but you've also got a shortened sight radius which makes the front blade appear larger than it normally would on a full sized rifle. Personally, I prefer small apertures and finer front sight blades, but that's in the daytime. Of course tritium irons or illuminated optics like a red dot or a reflex type would be faster and more effective in the dark.

On the subject of optics, I personally think that for a SOCOM the best solution is to get an Aimpoint H1/T1 as low as possible on the rail. The EoTech just sits way too high b/c it was designed for the inline buttstock and low rail height attributes of the AR15. If you sue one on an M1A, you're going to have a chin weld or else you'll need to find a good cheek rest or even a completely different stock.

Again, those are just my opinions based on my experiences.

Click to expand...

Will putting a Ultimak M8 rail work with a Eotech? I saw a YouTube video of a guy who put that rail on his socom 16 with a micro Aimpoint red dot. He said with that setup he could still co-witness through the Aimpoint without putting a check rest on the stock.

It appears to me that the Ultimak is either the same height, or slightly lower than the factory Scout rail that comes on the rifle. I would expect to contend with the cheek weld issues if your plan is to stick with the EoTech. Aimpoints just seem to have many more mounting options with various heights, which helps greatly when mounting them on different types of firearms. With the EoTech, its design drastically favors the AR layout.

boricua9mm said:

It appears to me that the Ultimak is either the same height, or slightly lower than the factory Scout rail that comes on the rifle. I would expect to contend with the cheek weld issues if your plan is to stick with the EoTech. Aimpoints just seem to have many more mounting options with various heights, which helps greatly when mounting them on different types of firearms. With the EoTech, its design drastically favors the AR layout.

Click to expand...

Cool.. I figured the EoTech were built more for the AR platforms but, I didn't know if it would work well with the Socom as I have seen pics with them mounted. Thanks for clearing that up since, I am trying to get my research done and wish list put together lol.

That round is perfectly capable of terminal performance well out past 600 yards. If I understand this correctly the front sight blade on the 16 inch barrel is narrower than the standard M1A blade, is that right? If so there would be a good reason for that. Take an M1 for instance, the thickness of the blade is no accident. It is used for ranging. An M1 front blade represents 8MOA. Using this and comparing it to your target (in military terms roughly 20 inches for the width of shoulders) the thickness of the blade in relation to the shoulder spacing gives approximate range to target. So if the enemy's shoulders appear the same thickness as the blade, then 8MOA= 20 inches, and your range is approximately 250 yards. So it would make sense that the blade on a shorter barrel would be thinner is this metric were to be preserved.

My socom is a 3-4 moa rifle. Nothing shoots better than 3 moa. Nothing shoots worse than 4 moa. I tried everything to get it to shoot better. No joy. I now have it set up with a micro aimpoint as my home defense rifle. My truck rifles are 1-2 moa LR-308's with Leupold 1.5-5 illuminated scopes.

Can a Socom get 300 yard hits on a man sized target? Sure. But if 3/4's of the target is behind cover at 300 yards, I'd rather have a more accurate rifle in my hands.

Met a guy who ran a DPMS LR-308 with a 16" barrel at Whittington out to 1,000 yards. Hit like 8 out of 10 times on steel.

Click to expand...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=15qj032UJ1I 18 inch bolt a 1k

Click to expand...

Neither of those have anything to do, at all, with the question at hand, which is what can a decent rifleman expect to be able to do with a Springfield M1A SOCOM 16. That's not an inherently accurate, direct impingement AR action, and it isn't a bolt rifle. It is a shortened, modified, loose, "CQB-style" M-14 clone with very coarse sights.

That round is perfectly capable of terminal performance well out past 600 yards.

Click to expand...

Well past that, certainly, but again, the round's capacity isn't in question.

If I understand this correctly the front sight blade on the 16 inch barrel is narrower than the standard M1A blade, is that right?

Click to expand...

No, and that's a key issue. The front sight of the SOCOM is a big, chunky, XS Sights post with tritium insert for quick pointing at close range.

See?



You could certainly change things about the rifle, from the sights to bedding the action, shims, etc., and possibly get it to tighten up like a match rifle that's had similar treatments, but that's not a SOCOM 16 then.

You could certainly change things about the rifle, from the sights to bedding the action, shims, etc., and possibly get it to tighten up like a match rifle that's had similar treatments, but that's not a SOCOM 16 then.

Click to expand...

I couldn't have agreed with you more on that Sam. I think if you want that type of accuracy then go with a Squad Scout or Match rifle but, if you want a more compact easy to bring on target rifle then I think SOCOM 16 would fit the bill.

I have shot one on ipsc torso steel at 400 yards, so no worries. FWIW, my precision rifle has a 16 inch 308 barrel and it has gone to 1000.

Out of the dta with 175s and 43.0g varget, I get 2475 fps. I can't remember the SOCOM's velocity off the top of my head, but probably just a bit less than the DTA.

I had a SOCOM when they first came out. The sights are the major issue for shooting with any precision past 100 yards. The fat front sight bascally covers, or exceeds a "people" target at 100 yards, and the rear sight has been drilled to a ghost ring. Nothing wrong with them if used as intended, but as the range increases, the challenge begins. I was told by Springfield you can replace them with the Scout/Bush model "standard" type sights if you want something a little easier for longer range shooting.

One thing to consider too with all of the different barrel lengths is the number of clicks each requires for the different ranges. For example, at 100 yards, my standard model zero was around 8-10 clicks, my Bush model was 14, and my SOCOM was 22.

I used both a Scout scope and Aimpoint on my SOCOM as well as the irons. My favorite was the Aimpoint, but the scope was OK too. Using ball ammo and the Aimpoint, the SOCOM shoots pretty much like my AKs at around a 100 yards, when shot the same way. The AK's are a lot easier handling wise though, especially when shot realistically.

At this point, I cant say for sure which shot which (hey, Im getting CRS ), but one was my SOCOM with its Aimpoint, the other one of my AK's with an Aimpoint on it as well(Im thinking the one on the left was te SOCOM). Doesnt really matter though, as they are basically the same.



If I were to buy another M1A, Id probably go with a standard rifle with an Ultimak/Aimpoint combo on it. The factory rail on mine was steel, got very hot, very quick, retained that heat a long time, and wasnt even mil spec, so none of my mil spec mounts would fit. The Ultimak is a class act, and works very well.

A co-worker had his SOCOM 16 at the range yesterday. He was using the .308 EOTech (which I really liked) and had it zeroed. Not sure what his zero was but it was spot on at 300 yards and with a little adjustment, we were making consitent hits out to 400 yards. With better optics, it would be more than capable out to 500 and maybe even 600 yards. The post range goes out to 1000 yards, so we'll eventually get to test that out.

Needless to say, I was impressed for such an "inaccurate" short barrel length

I have an older 18" barrel M1A Bush model and I've been able to his man-sized plates at 500 yards very consistently (with assistance of a low-powered optics).

ROCK6

My SOCOM 16 would fry electric optics in rapid strings of fire. Nothing like having you're $1400 gun fry your $450 scope. Traded for a scout/squad, which I then traded for a Armalite AR-10 carbine, and haven't looked back.