Fnar Vs SA M21

[BIGRETIC]

Title pretty much sums it up.Springfield M21 vs Fnar for accuracy.The SA is a 3000$ gun and a helluva a pickup.What do yall think?

 

[lipadj46]

M21 is based on an actual US military sniper rifle in use even today. For the money though I would do a custom build on an LRB M25 receiver. I would assume the M21 would be far more accurate at long distances due to the bedded action and accuracy improvements that the FNAR does not have. I just plain don't like the FNAR though

 

[Retro]

Also M21 is extremely heavy and thus very stable with minimal recoil, and so if you are going to carry that around in the wood for hunting, you should probably pick a lighter weapon than M21. The heavy weight Douglas/Krieger barriel is a whole pound heavier than standard weight barrel. But it is hella-of-a-gun!

 

[lipadj46]

The M25 is even sweeter (and heavier) that the M21 though like I said above for the money I am not sure who is buying a Springfield when you can get an LRB M25 build for that same money. The price of Springfield M1A rifles stop making sense after the National Match and Supermatch models.

 

[TIMC]

All depends on what you want to do with it. I love my M-21, it's a great shooting rifle but it is not a hunter; too heavy. I bought mine last year new for $2600.

 

[dbooksta]

If money is a factor I don't see how you could not go with the FNAR. For $1400 you get a .308 autoloader that out of the box shoots better than 1/2 MOA, and comes with rails for all the tactical goodies you might want to add. Which leaves you with plenty of money for optics.

Only objection I've heard on the FNAR is that it looks ugly.