Is an M1A Overkill for a New Shooter
- Thread starter oates
- Start date
- Status
You can learn to shoot well on a full-power firearm--nobody is denying this. However, you can get 90% of the experience for 10% of the money if you practice with a .22 LR. Toss some good dry-fire practice into the mix and you can improve your skill for pennies on the dollar.
My first rifle was a Springfield Armory, Inc. Loaded M1A. It was love at first kick, but I was a very poor shot with it, and the prospect of getting better at fifty cents per trigger pull was disheartening. I acquired a 10/22 and installed some Tech Sights and tossed a cheap USGI web sling on it. I reduced some targets on my computer and shoot at them from 25 yards with the 10/22. What's funny is that I only shoot a little more ammo out of the 10/22 than would be used with the M1A because I spend the same amount of time lining up shots, getting the breathing right, etc. It's a lot cheaper, though.
As has been mentioned, a 10/22, even one outfitted in this fashion, is still not an M1A. That's where dry-fire practice comes in. I reduced some targets even further on my computer so they appear to be the right size when taped to the "safe direction" wall of my family room. I practice shooting positions, trigger pull, and cheekweld with the full-sized rifle on a nice warm carpet, and all I have to worry about is a little friendly mockery from the wife.
As a result of these techniques, my riflery skills have gone from absymal to merely mediocre in less than 400 rounds of actual .308 ammo. I've seen improvements with every range trip, which has really enhanced my enjoyment of the rifle. Like I said earlier, you can do just fine without a .22, but boy does it help.
My first rifle was a Springfield Armory, Inc. Loaded M1A. It was love at first kick, but I was a very poor shot with it, and the prospect of getting better at fifty cents per trigger pull was disheartening. I acquired a 10/22 and installed some Tech Sights and tossed a cheap USGI web sling on it. I reduced some targets on my computer and shoot at them from 25 yards with the 10/22. What's funny is that I only shoot a little more ammo out of the 10/22 than would be used with the M1A because I spend the same amount of time lining up shots, getting the breathing right, etc. It's a lot cheaper, though.
As has been mentioned, a 10/22, even one outfitted in this fashion, is still not an M1A. That's where dry-fire practice comes in. I reduced some targets even further on my computer so they appear to be the right size when taped to the "safe direction" wall of my family room. I practice shooting positions, trigger pull, and cheekweld with the full-sized rifle on a nice warm carpet, and all I have to worry about is a little friendly mockery from the wife.
As a result of these techniques, my riflery skills have gone from absymal to merely mediocre in less than 400 rounds of actual .308 ammo. I've seen improvements with every range trip, which has really enhanced my enjoyment of the rifle. Like I said earlier, you can do just fine without a .22, but boy does it help.
longdayjake
Member
Well in the video he shoots himself with the g22 right after he says "I'm the only one in this room professional enough."
I know the 21 and the 22 are different calibers but I was just trying to make a dumb joke.
FAIL
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
Waterman you seem to have a reading comprehension problem. I stated a significant example of a SHTF scenario in America, as a rebuttal to your assertion that he forget about that concern. Nowhere did I state that one weapon was superior to another for that purpose. I actually suggested that oates acquire a bolt action 22 for training. If you would like a comprehensive list of specific firearms used in a time when the police fled and a minority (the koreans) were left with only their best defenses... Well keep hoping. Common sense and a little perspective bear out everything I am saying. If the comments are insignificant to you is no concern to me. Some of us in this thread are making an active attempt to provide oates with honest information.
There is nothing wrong with responsible people preparing for bad situations. A rimfire would be a sorry substitute for an M1A for a man stuck on a rooftop surrounded by rioters.
There is nothing wrong with responsible people preparing for bad situations. A rimfire would be a sorry substitute for an M1A for a man stuck on a rooftop surrounded by rioters.
JR47
Member
Any knowledgeable range or club will have someone that can instruct on a rifle or hand-gun, for the asking. The idea that someone needs a .22 to start with is just not true. You can learn the basics with virtually any rifle.
I learned to shoot centerfire with an M1 Garand, courtesy of the Navy in 1965. Prior to that, I'd been shooting rim-fire rifles, but not nearly as much as I'd have liked to. I graduated from that to the M14 rifle, and then learned to shoot the 1911A1, again courtesy of the Navy.
I didn't even OWN a .22 rifle until leaving the military. Yes, they're fun, and yes, ammo is cheap. However, the idea of defending yourself with one is regularly derided on this Site. Some of the posters who do that are posting here now.
The M1A, or M14, needs nothing near the maintenance of the AR platform until you reach Master, or Grandmaster levels. The design is rugged, accurate, and dependable. Magazines are running $20.00 today. The 7.62x51 cartridge is legal to hunt game with, and that's something that the .223 can't say in the majority of states. The cartridge is also capable of turning AR type cover, into concealment.
The Korean shopkeepers in L.A. during the Rodney King temper tantrums did, indeed, defend their shops against rioters and looters. None of those filmed used a .22 lr anything to do so. How many? Several dozens of them, all over the rioting areas.
SHTF isn't, as was brought up, a nation-wide condition. Many times it's very local. The riots in NYC in 1965, when the power went out, was only in a couple of Boroughs. The LA riots of 1992 weren't even city-wide. The Miami riots were only in a single section of Miami. The members of the community defending their property in the wake of Florida's hurricane were only near the phenomena, as were those in New Orleans for Katrina.
The .22 lr is sufficient to forage with. It's advantage in weight of ammunition is one of gathering food, not defending against large predators, or people. If it's all that you have, it beats a tooth-pick.
I learned to shoot centerfire with an M1 Garand, courtesy of the Navy in 1965. Prior to that, I'd been shooting rim-fire rifles, but not nearly as much as I'd have liked to. I graduated from that to the M14 rifle, and then learned to shoot the 1911A1, again courtesy of the Navy.
I didn't even OWN a .22 rifle until leaving the military. Yes, they're fun, and yes, ammo is cheap. However, the idea of defending yourself with one is regularly derided on this Site. Some of the posters who do that are posting here now.
The M1A, or M14, needs nothing near the maintenance of the AR platform until you reach Master, or Grandmaster levels. The design is rugged, accurate, and dependable. Magazines are running $20.00 today. The 7.62x51 cartridge is legal to hunt game with, and that's something that the .223 can't say in the majority of states. The cartridge is also capable of turning AR type cover, into concealment.
The Korean shopkeepers in L.A. during the Rodney King temper tantrums did, indeed, defend their shops against rioters and looters. None of those filmed used a .22 lr anything to do so. How many? Several dozens of them, all over the rioting areas.
SHTF isn't, as was brought up, a nation-wide condition. Many times it's very local. The riots in NYC in 1965, when the power went out, was only in a couple of Boroughs. The LA riots of 1992 weren't even city-wide. The Miami riots were only in a single section of Miami. The members of the community defending their property in the wake of Florida's hurricane were only near the phenomena, as were those in New Orleans for Katrina.
The .22 lr is sufficient to forage with. It's advantage in weight of ammunition is one of gathering food, not defending against large predators, or people. If it's all that you have, it beats a tooth-pick.
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
I did a little more reading, it appears the sks was the weapon of choice among the koreans in LA.
Oates, that being said: an sks and a case or two of ammunition can be had for the cost of an m1a. It won't be as powerful or accurate, but they are functional guns.
Oates, that being said: an sks and a case or two of ammunition can be had for the cost of an m1a. It won't be as powerful or accurate, but they are functional guns.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
i'm not saying that you can't get a centerfire rifle in addition to the 10-22.
you can get a 10-22 and an SKS and tech sights for each for the price of an m-1A.
you can get a 10-22 and an SKS and tech sights for each for the price of an m-1A.
The Navy isn't going to be buying his ammo.
I don't think anyone here is saying that you can't learn on an M1A, just that it's cheaper and more efficient to practice on a .22. Like I've said twice already, get the M1A AND a .22.
Jason
MTMilitiaman
Member
I can understand the appeal of starting a young child or small statured adult on a .22. I learned on a Winchester M63, but I was four-years old. Most adults should be fine with any centerfire rifle in the .308 class. My step-mom shot my M1A her first time out shooting a rifle and did okay with it, even if she preferred the Mini-14. I can't imagine an adult male be intimidated by the M1A. That is definitely grounds for revoking of Man Card. We're talking about a ten-pound, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle here. From a 6.5 pound bolt action with a steel buttplate, the .308 isn't bad. From an M1A, it's a pussy cat.
While the M1A is more difficult to field strip for maintenance, to suggest that it requires more maintenance than the AR is bull-pucky. Nothing could be further from the truth. With the exception of certain Russian designs and possibly the FAL, the M1A requires less maintenance than just about any other semi-automatic rifle system available. The M1A's receiver remains cool and clean through hundreds of rounds and requires only infrequent maintenance consisting of a quick scrubbing with a toothbrush and a wipe down with a clean rag. It's more accessible than the AR receiver, so even disregarding how much dirty the AR's receiver is likely to be, this process is much quicker and more trouble free with the M1A. The bolt, like the receiver, has fewer tight spaces and edges to clean, including far fewer lugs. For regular maintenance, the user really only has to pull the cable of his Otis cleaning kit or a Bore Snake through the bore as desired, and disassemble the gas system every couple hundred rounds or so. Unless one has subjected their rifle to a sand pit or mud bog, or other adverse condition not likely found under normal range use, one could easily go a long time without ever even taking their M1A out of its stock.
As for the Springfield rifles, I was skeptical as well when I bought my M1A. All the talk of cast receivers had me thinking. Receiving the rifle and taking it to the range quelled my fears. The Springfield M1A is an excellent rifle. Be advised, however, that M1As are addictive, and having bought your first, you'll quickly begin thinking about your next. Which, with the pros out of the way, brings me to the cons:
1. The M1A offers a shooting experience matched by no other design. It is about as accurate, reliable, trouble-free, and durable as it is possible for a rifle to be. The sights and trigger are among the best ever put on a battle rifle. The ergonomics and balance are excellent. But the experience is more than the sum of its parts. Popping your rifle cherry to an M1A is like losing your virginity to ______insert favor porn star here_______. It just ruins the experience with everything else.
2. Because the experience is so rewarding, M1As are addictive. An 18 inch Scout could easily to everything you could ask of a rifle out to at least 600 yards, but that won't matter. You'll find increasingly smaller M1A niches that need to be filled. I have a full-size Loaded, but I had no sooner wafted the smoke from the handguards my first time out with it than I started thinking about an 18 inch Scout in a Sage, a Super Match in a JAE Gen II, a Chinese Polytech under the seat in the truck, a SOCOM 16 next to the bedstand... ...
3. Ammo, like everything else nowdays, is expensive. While I won't claim this is a good thing, good can come of it. You'll focus on the fundamentals and make every shot count. At $.40 a pop, you'll do less bump-firing and random noise-making, and more real, honest, practice.
I am cross-eye dominant--that is, right-handed but left-eye dominant. I shoot left-handed because of this.
I have never had a semi-automatic rifle give me problems shooting it left-handed. I have never, not once, had a case ejected back at me or anything like that. The only time this has occurred has been after the empty has ricocheted off cover on my right, and this can occur to any design and to right-handed shooters as well.
For a lefty, the M1A is an excellent choice. Springfield advises that left-handed shooters attempt to shoot the rifle right-handed, but I have not found this to be necessary, and in fact, the design seems to favor left-handed shooters. The safety and mag release are ambi and easily accessible to both right-handed and left-handed shooters. But the location of the charging handle on the right side of the rifle requires right-handed shooters to either move their firing hand from the firing position or move their support hand over or under the receiver, which can be difficult and comparatively time consuming, esp with optics and a twenty-round magazine in place. This is the same problem faced by right-handed shooters with the Kalashnikov, and it is one that you as a lefty don't have, with either design.
The AR is fine for lefties and you can cope with practice, but for left-handed shooters, it is ergonomically far inferior to the M1A/M14.
On the M1A, cases are ejected slightly upwards at about the 2 o' clock position, in my experience, well away from the shooter. Rest easy and ride thee into the sunset...
While the M1A is more difficult to field strip for maintenance, to suggest that it requires more maintenance than the AR is bull-pucky. Nothing could be further from the truth. With the exception of certain Russian designs and possibly the FAL, the M1A requires less maintenance than just about any other semi-automatic rifle system available. The M1A's receiver remains cool and clean through hundreds of rounds and requires only infrequent maintenance consisting of a quick scrubbing with a toothbrush and a wipe down with a clean rag. It's more accessible than the AR receiver, so even disregarding how much dirty the AR's receiver is likely to be, this process is much quicker and more trouble free with the M1A. The bolt, like the receiver, has fewer tight spaces and edges to clean, including far fewer lugs. For regular maintenance, the user really only has to pull the cable of his Otis cleaning kit or a Bore Snake through the bore as desired, and disassemble the gas system every couple hundred rounds or so. Unless one has subjected their rifle to a sand pit or mud bog, or other adverse condition not likely found under normal range use, one could easily go a long time without ever even taking their M1A out of its stock.
As for the Springfield rifles, I was skeptical as well when I bought my M1A. All the talk of cast receivers had me thinking. Receiving the rifle and taking it to the range quelled my fears. The Springfield M1A is an excellent rifle. Be advised, however, that M1As are addictive, and having bought your first, you'll quickly begin thinking about your next. Which, with the pros out of the way, brings me to the cons:
1. The M1A offers a shooting experience matched by no other design. It is about as accurate, reliable, trouble-free, and durable as it is possible for a rifle to be. The sights and trigger are among the best ever put on a battle rifle. The ergonomics and balance are excellent. But the experience is more than the sum of its parts. Popping your rifle cherry to an M1A is like losing your virginity to ______insert favor porn star here_______. It just ruins the experience with everything else.
2. Because the experience is so rewarding, M1As are addictive. An 18 inch Scout could easily to everything you could ask of a rifle out to at least 600 yards, but that won't matter. You'll find increasingly smaller M1A niches that need to be filled. I have a full-size Loaded, but I had no sooner wafted the smoke from the handguards my first time out with it than I started thinking about an 18 inch Scout in a Sage, a Super Match in a JAE Gen II, a Chinese Polytech under the seat in the truck, a SOCOM 16 next to the bedstand... ...
3. Ammo, like everything else nowdays, is expensive. While I won't claim this is a good thing, good can come of it. You'll focus on the fundamentals and make every shot count. At $.40 a pop, you'll do less bump-firing and random noise-making, and more real, honest, practice.
I am cross-eye dominant--that is, right-handed but left-eye dominant. I shoot left-handed because of this.
I have never had a semi-automatic rifle give me problems shooting it left-handed. I have never, not once, had a case ejected back at me or anything like that. The only time this has occurred has been after the empty has ricocheted off cover on my right, and this can occur to any design and to right-handed shooters as well.
For a lefty, the M1A is an excellent choice. Springfield advises that left-handed shooters attempt to shoot the rifle right-handed, but I have not found this to be necessary, and in fact, the design seems to favor left-handed shooters. The safety and mag release are ambi and easily accessible to both right-handed and left-handed shooters. But the location of the charging handle on the right side of the rifle requires right-handed shooters to either move their firing hand from the firing position or move their support hand over or under the receiver, which can be difficult and comparatively time consuming, esp with optics and a twenty-round magazine in place. This is the same problem faced by right-handed shooters with the Kalashnikov, and it is one that you as a lefty don't have, with either design.
The AR is fine for lefties and you can cope with practice, but for left-handed shooters, it is ergonomically far inferior to the M1A/M14.
On the M1A, cases are ejected slightly upwards at about the 2 o' clock position, in my experience, well away from the shooter. Rest easy and ride thee into the sunset...
Possible, since the felt recoil is a major factor with M1 type rifles.
I guess the question is, do you really want to spend the big money on a "first rifle" and maybe regret it for many other possible reasons.
Try the good ol Ruger mini 14 and see how you like it.
I guess the question is, do you really want to spend the big money on a "first rifle" and maybe regret it for many other possible reasons.
Try the good ol Ruger mini 14 and see how you like it.
Gunfighter123
Member
Get the M1A and get a .22 !!!! Problem is --which M1A ??? Guess if one is good -- then two are better
JR47
Member
Just can't let it go, can you? The cost of .22 lr is now approaching $5.00/50 of anything BUT bulk ammo. Bulk ammo is neither as reliable, nor accurate, as the lower tier standards.
The .308 FMj can be had for $9.00/20 here http://www.the-armory.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/308_Ammunition.html
Prices are coming down, and, when the current war cools off, they will soon be down to the $5.00/20 range, as they were after Vietnam, and Gulf War I.
Learning to shoot an M1A is certainly no more expensive than learning to shoot a deer rifle.
I own a TRW M14, a Class 3 M1A1 (SAI nomenclature on the box), and an M1A loaded. Most new shooters can get along quite nicely with 100 rounds per outting to learn with. After two trips, they will have the fundamentals down. Heck, they can go to an Appleseed shoot, and learn from experts.
The Koreans had a mix of guns. The SKS wasn't overly represented. Remember, they were in California, a state that severely restricts choices. Look at the abomination that they've made of the AR platform there.
Choose what you want. The M1A is a fine beginners weapon. It will do everything that you need. If you want a .22, good enough. Get one. The M1A will do more, that's all.
I fail to see how you can't recognize that .22lr is quite a bit cheaper than .308. And the $9.00 stuff you pointed out is steel-cased Barnaul
. I also highly doubt we'll ever see $5.00/20 rnds for decent .308 ammo again.I guarantee you if you ask, an overwhelming majority of hunters will tell you how they learned on a .22.
For decent ammo (not crappy Barnaul or Wolf, but not Federal GMM either), you will spend about $20 per box of 20 rnds. So your trip of 100 rounds will cost about $100 if you want to do anything more than make noise and a bunch of carbon in your gas cylinder.
The same trip with a .22 would cost about $10, if that.
I own an M1A, and they are a whole lot of fun. I am not saying "don't get one," and I'm not even saying one can't learn on it, just that it is more cost efficient to learn on a .22.
Jason
JR47
Member
Did you even look at the link? Try using a calculator function to check out the German 147 gr. FMJBT @ $209.99/500 rounds. That would be 25 boxes. Mathematics is your friend.
I never said that .22 lr wasn't cheaper than .308. I simply pointed out that there is reasonably priced .308 available. What you doubt has already happened twice, so, let's just agree that , in your opinion, it won't happen a THIRD time.
Not the OP's question, is it? I would also ask how many of the hunter's who learned to hunt as an adult bought a .22 FIRST? That's not going to be an overwhelming majority.
Gosh, isn't math wonderful? I'm guessing that you'll be retracting this now, right? The German ammo is readily available in many stores, and gun shows, as well as on-line. I use neither Wolf, nor Barnaul in my M1A. Instead, I use the surplus that I stock-piled over the years, or the latest German surplus. In fact, when I teach a new-comer to the M1A platform, I usually allow them to buy ammo from me, of known provenance and accuracy, if they don't have decent ammo.
This argument is getting old.
Everyone seems to agree that you can learn on an M1A. That is not in question.
OP, you just have to ask yourself what you can afford. If you can afford the M1A and plenty of ammo, go and get it. It is a great rifle.
Let's assume you will learn the basics on 500 rounds. You can go two routes
1)You can buy 500 rounds of .308. That will cost you about $250
2) Or you could purchase a .22 rifle and 500 rounds of ammo for $200 total and learn the basics. Then you can buy the M1A and spend that extra $50 on ammo to get used to the recoil.
Either way you end up in the same place with regards to your M1A, but if you go the second route you end up with an extra rifle for cheap plinking.
I have a tendency to be really enthusiastic about stuff for a while and then lose interest. If this happens to you, I would definitely buy the .22 first.
In the end, do what you want. As long as you wallet is fat enough, you can't go wrong here.
Everyone seems to agree that you can learn on an M1A. That is not in question.
OP, you just have to ask yourself what you can afford. If you can afford the M1A and plenty of ammo, go and get it. It is a great rifle.
Let's assume you will learn the basics on 500 rounds. You can go two routes
1)You can buy 500 rounds of .308. That will cost you about $250
2) Or you could purchase a .22 rifle and 500 rounds of ammo for $200 total and learn the basics. Then you can buy the M1A and spend that extra $50 on ammo to get used to the recoil.
Either way you end up in the same place with regards to your M1A, but if you go the second route you end up with an extra rifle for cheap plinking.
I have a tendency to be really enthusiastic about stuff for a while and then lose interest. If this happens to you, I would definitely buy the .22 first.
In the end, do what you want. As long as you wallet is fat enough, you can't go wrong here.
SSN Vet
Member
Personally, I'm not conviced that a M1A is either required, OR desired for your run of the mill SHTF puposes.
Don't get me wrong, I'd give my left nut to have one and would enjoy re-loading for it as well.
Just don't think it's the best option for stated task.
Intermediate rifle cartridges became predominate ages ago. And though there's need for long legs and penetrating power in every rifle company, we're not really talking about standing up rifle companies here, are we?
Don't get me wrong, I'd give my left nut to have one and would enjoy re-loading for it as well.
Just don't think it's the best option for stated task.
Intermediate rifle cartridges became predominate ages ago. And though there's need for long legs and penetrating power in every rifle company, we're not really talking about standing up rifle companies here, are we?
jacobhh
Member
IMHO the M1A is worth every dollar of the difference.
If you want to own and shoot a .30 cal gas gun, buy one. The handling,
operation, maintenance and recoil are totally different from that of a
10/22. If you're going to flinch due to recoil a thousand .22 rounds
aren't going to teach that away.
If you can afford a $1500+ rifle, you can afford the surplus ammo for
it. There are plenty of sources for 7.62x51 at a reasonable price. The
Garand is a good choice also.
Why would a person who wants to shoot an M14 type rifle waste time
and money on a .22 then buy the rifle they want? You can get accostomed
to the hold, trigger squeeze and aim at home, then get real at the range.
jacobhh
Member
IMHO the M1A is worth every dollar of the difference.
If you want to own and shoot a .30 cal gas gun, buy one. The handling,
operation, maintenance and recoil are totally different from that of a
10/22. If you're going to flinch due to recoil a thousand .22 rounds
aren't going to teach that away.
If you can afford a $1500+ rifle, you can afford the surplus ammo for
it. There are plenty of sources for 7.62x51 at a reasonable price. The
Garand is a good choice also.
Why would a person who wants to shoot an M14 type rifle waste time
and money on a .22 then buy the rifle they want? You can get accostomed
to the hold, trigger squeeze and aim at home, then get real at the range.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
With a .22 you can do way more shooting in a day without becoming tired than you can with an m-1A, and you can do it at any range facility. it has lower recoil, so you can learn the fundamentals more quickly and more easily. you can pass it down to your kid for his first gun. you can take small game with it quietly and without spoiling a lot of meat.
I'm not saying that he can't own an m-1a, i'm just saying that it's not the best gun for a beginner, becaue it has recoil, ammunition is expensive, and it requires that you know stuff to do basic things like sight it in.
I really do like the m-1A. seriously.
but i think the OP would be better served by spending the 1500 dollars on a 10-22 with Tech Sights, a Glock 19, and an SKS with tech sights. more guns.
I'm not saying that he can't own an m-1a, i'm just saying that it's not the best gun for a beginner, becaue it has recoil, ammunition is expensive, and it requires that you know stuff to do basic things like sight it in.
I really do like the m-1A. seriously.
but i think the OP would be better served by spending the 1500 dollars on a 10-22 with Tech Sights, a Glock 19, and an SKS with tech sights. more guns.
- Status