M1A Optics: Am I on the right track?

Status
Not open for further replies.

American Finn

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
197
Location
Northern Michigan
Hello! I have read some of the other posts here in THR and cannot find reference to this kind of scope and mount combination. I was thinking of putting a Redfield 3x9 Variable scope on my M1A and using either a Bassett Standard Scope Base or one from Springfield Armory.

I have only used the iron sights on my M1A, but was thinking of putting a scope on it for prairie dog and deer hunting here in central South Dakota. Any advice that you may provide is appreciated. Thank you!
 
I would avoid the Springfield mount, they can be problematic.

I recommend the Sadlak mount for the M1A, it's a improved Brookfield design.
http://sadlak.com/si_improvements_to_bpt.html

Sadlak also offers a "inspection kit" that insures the receiver is in spec and you well have the correct fit. This is important for the mount to hold zero.
http://sadlak.com/si_inspect_kit.html

I'm using a Sadlak mount with Burris extreme rings and a 3-10X44 TAC II scope, 1.5k+ rounds with no problems.
 
I have a Basset low railed mount for my M1a and it's very nice. Holds zero fine, very tough.

I haven't had my Leup. scope give out on this rifle, but I have had a Vepr 308 ruin a Leup scope.
 
The M1A/M14 will knock a scope out for some reason or other...I had to return a near new Redfield 6x40 because it lasted about 80 rounds on top an M1A..

The scope mount needs to attach to the clip guide or it's dovetail..and the mounting screw on the side of receiver..the single screw side mounts are not all that stable...and will work loose and lose accuracy over time.

You just need to put a good sturdy scope on..a Leupold or Ziess or some high quality scope is your best bet..something with a good warrenty if you go with a cheaper scope.

That's not to say a cheap scope won't survive on top an M14 rifle..I had a cheap Bushnell 3-9 last very well on top a Polytech...but like I mentioned..a good quality..not all that cheap Redfield died quick(which they gave me a brandnew one..I just put it one another rifle)...I also had a Tasco 3-9(cheap) drop the cross-hairs on an M1A..while a not too expensive Russian made illuminated retical scope has hung together well..but it weighs like 4 pounds of scope!!
 
Bassett from the website:


Chief Isenberg was responsible for making sure the 160 NM-M14 National Match rifles were accurate and met or exceeded National Match standards. Only the most accurate rifles were used in competitions at state and regional matches.
The rifles were also used for the standard National Match course of fire at matches conducted throughout U.S. Army facilities in the U.S.; in addition, the NM rifles were used by different teams from Fort Hood for the national matches at Camp Perry.
Chief Isenberg used a single Weaver T-10 Scope and Bassett Standard Scope Mount unit to test 160 rifles for accuracy, three times a year for 2 years.
He shot four 5-round groups, slow fire, at 100 yards. If the accuracy was acceptable, the rifle was marked acceptable for match use. He removed the scope and mount unit and put it on the next rifle and shot another four 5-round groups, and so on with 160 rifles. Three times a year for two years. Ammo used was Lake City NM M118 173grain bullets.
The Bassett mount was the most useful tool used to determine the accuracy of the rifles. By using the T10 Weaver and the Bassett mount, he eliminated many possible shooter errors which resulted in a truer test of the rifles’ accuracy.
Doing the math, that comes to 19,200 rounds against the same scope and mount unit. The mount never showed signs of shifting or wear on the action.
During these runs, it was determined that 22 inch-pounds to be sufficient to hold the mount with no shifting and yet not distort the rifle action or compromise accuracy. This is why Bassett Machine recommends using a consistent installation of 22 inch-pounds.
 
Last edited:
I use the Basset Low Picatinny with Weaver rings and a Leupy 3.5-10x40 with a duplex reticle. I picked the duplex before I first mounted the scope because I was concerned that ejected brass would hit the windage knob and I'd have to rotate the scope 90* to avoid that. Luckily it didn't.

I'll be getting a Leupy Mk 4 FFP with MilDots for my Supermatch down the road a bit, but the current set-up is just fine. I put a US Palm cheek pad on it to give me a good check weld when using the scope...and it holds a spare mag as well.

FH
 
I would also not recommend the SAI mount. They are somewhat notorious in the M-14 community for coming loose.

I personally have an ARMS #18 mount and love it. It is very solid (made of the same grade steel as the M-14 receiver), and is the lowest mount available, which minimizes how tall of a cheek rest you have to put on the rifle. You can get away with a pretty low one if you mount a scope in some low rings.
 
Does anyone have pics of their setup? I went to the lgs to try a scope setup on my soccom II and the mounts put the scope either too low or too far forward.
 
This scope is in medium rings, I Think I'm going to replace them with a low set and try a different cheek rest. The Sadlak mount has been a rock and no ejection problems. I friend put a ARM's on his M14 and we ended up milling part of the bottom off for ejection issues.

crop9.jpg
 
I started with an aluminum Springfield Armory mount on my M1A. It lasted less than 100 rounds before it wouldn't hold a zero. The "ribs" on the backside deformed slightly, which let the scope rock slightly vertically every shot.

Went to a Sadlak, it's been perfect.
 
Several years ago, I kept having problems with the SA mount. I had even had my gunsmith install the thing. I was looking for a better mount and ended up with the Bassett to mount my Burris 8X32X50 mil dot. It goes on and off and holds zero. The Burris will last forever or they replace it free. I am very happy with the set up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top