New M1A, now need optics advice

[Red State]

If you want a nice low mount, use the ARMS #18 mount and medium rings. This provided the perfect amount of clearance over the rear sight to allow me to install a Nikon Buckmaster. A very thin cheek riser was all that was needed.

If you want to get really low, you can take out the rear sight and use low rings.

I would advise against any of the mounting systems that raise the scope well over the bore and thus require a large cheekpiece in order to allow you to maintain a cheek weld.

 

[DCSpringfield]

I see a LOT of compliments on the Sadlak mount, but, what is wrong with the steel mount that Springfield sells for their gun?

I have a new M1A Scout Squad and not sure if I want a scope mounted on the receiver or use the forward pic rail. My eyes aren't what they used to be and I have troubles shooting handguns now. I wear mono-contact lenses, meaning, I wear my long range lens in my left eye and no lens in right eye. Brain and eyes coordinate for long range seeing like driving etc. and for reading close. Causes a problem when shooting handguns. Wondering if I'd be able to use the long eye relief front mount with a low powered scope or if I should just get a receiver mount and get it up near my eye. No problems with using a close scope

I should mention it will be used for 100-200 yd target. No hunting.

D.

 

[DCSpringfield]

Does anyone have a good link to a video or drawing or manual PDF showing HOW the Sprinfield mounts with the STEEL mount ( which I HEAR has 3 contact points) vs the aluminum mount. Springfields picture on their website is worthless and I cannot find one in real-life to look at or see one mounted on a rifle.

 

[jeepguy]

i went with the sadlak airborne mount on my socom & i am very pleased. i would stick to sadlak, smith, arms or basset. for optics i went with the accupoint 1-4x24 & i am happy with it as well. on a full length rifle i would want at least a 3-9 or higher. if you go with a red dot like an aimpont it will co witness with an ultimak rail. on my bush rifle an 18" m1a i put an ultimak mount with an aimpoint & then changed it out for a leupold scout scope & liked that setup better. no matter what you do they are great rifles & a lot of fun to shoot. good luck.

 

[DCSpringfield]

Thanks jeepguy, but, still looking for better info on the Springfield gen 4 steel mount? Still no answer about WHY the other brands are better? SADLAK certainly has a better webpage for their mounts than the single little pic that Springfield has. But, with the "Loaded" coupon with the gun the gen 4 mounts are cheaper than sadlak. now, If I can just find out what the diff is and why everyone doesn't recommend them.
I asked a guy at a gun show yesterday who had 6 m1a's for sale. I asked him. Same story...."buy ARMS, Springfield is junk". When I asked why he said that he just said "they are no good" Told me nothing. I asked him if he knew anything about the gen 4 mounts in steel and how they attached different than the alum. one did, and he said he had no idea. So, I learned nothing from him!
i've decided to go with the rear scope instead of front rail just because of, more or less, eye problems. I've been looking at mostly 3-9 x 42ish scopes and some with lasers.

D.

D.

 

[Flatbush Harry]

After considerable research, I decided to go with the Basset mount...and have been completely satisfied. I have used it on my Supermatch, 1979 vintage as well as my 2006 vintage SOCOM 16 with excellent results.

As to the optic, I should note that, rather than using a BDC reticle, I went with a duplex because, unsure of how each rifle would kick out brass, I wanted to allow for rotating the scope 90* to have brass miss the windage knob. That was unnecessary as it turns out, but was a consideration. I've got a Leupold VX3 in 3.5-10x40 that is just terrific.

FH

 

[madcratebuilder]

Thanks jeepguy, but, still looking for better info on the Springfield gen 4 steel mount? Still no answer about WHY the other brands are better? SADLAK certainly has a better webpage for their mounts than the single little pic that Springfield has. But, with the "Loaded" coupon with the gun the gen 4 mounts are cheaper than sadlak. now, If I can just find out what the diff is and why everyone doesn't recommend them.
I asked a guy at a gun show yesterday who had 6 m1a's for sale. I asked him. Same story...."buy ARMS, Springfield is junk". When I asked why he said that he just said "they are no good" Told me nothing. I asked him if he knew anything about the gen 4 mounts in steel and how they attached different than the alum. one did, and he said he had no idea. So, I learned nothing from him!
i've decided to go with the rear scope instead of front rail just because of, more or less, eye problems. I've been looking at mostly 3-9 x 42ish scopes and some with lasers.

D.

D.

The early generation SA mounts had problems with fasteners coming loose and shifting zeros. I can't tell you if the Gen4 solved this or not.

There are a lot of reports of the new design Arms mount causing problems with ejection, cases hitting the mount and falling back in to the chamber.

Do some reading here, a lot more up to date info. on mounts.

http://www.m14tfl.com/upload/

 

[DCSpringfield]

Thanks Madcratebuilder,
I had just joined the M14 group and am now in the process of going through all the subjects.
With most gun groups, motorcycles groups, and I'm sure about anything else ever talked about in a 'group' it's very easy to get an 'opinion' with no facts to back it up and also brand snobbery is very popular, as is "I have this one, so it's the best' snobbery. Sometimes it just takes a while to filter through it all.
I watched the YouTube video on installing the Basset mount with a single attachment point. I'm glad that works great for you but the single attachment ones aren't getting many thumbs up. I like the picatinny rail type. Did you get the lower model or the higher model? Can you use your factory sights with it? I'm ASSUMING maybe the lower since the worry about cases? It's VERY similar to the single attachment scope mount on my old mini-14 made before the receivers were milled for scopes. I've never had it come lose, etc. But, recoil is a lot less. I like the quick on/off idea however.
I finally got Springfield to send me a mounting instruction so I think I can get most of my info from it now.
I certainly do like SADLAKS webpage and instructions/info, that alone is a real plus. I'm going to probably go STEEL in any case but the titanium price is just ridiculous! You certainly don't need titanium. I'm thinkin' 'Gimmick'. I'm still trying to figure out how they can get $260 $300 into a steel scope mount ??

 

[DCSpringfield]

OK, I read through the Springfield PDF file on installing the mount and I think I had all my questions answered. It appears the new third contact point on the Gen 4's is the same as the SADLAK being an adjustable screw at the front of receiver that 'tilts' the mount front-to-rear, and they have eliminated the large knob that used to screw into the old stripper clip dovetailed piece in favor of a set screw. Looks better and probably more secure. And, the side mount screw assy looks just as SADLAK which both have removed the old ugly big hand screws. All in all, looks just about identical to the Sadlak steel model? but, it's only $225 with the new-gun "Loaded' discount.

 

[DCSpringfield]

Re: sadlak vs Springfield 4th gen steel mount.
About the only difference I can see in the two is that the Springfield is cut out in center and the Sadlak rail runs full length. Any problems with ejected casings hitting the sadlak rail?

D.

 

[HKGuns]

Don't those already have a great peep sight? I think a scope looks funny on those rifles.

 

[Averageman]

Mr Bassets Scope Mount has served me well and you cannot compare his customer service and delivery speed in my opinion.
A well made American product that is sold by a Texas Gentleman.

 

[DCSpringfield]

Re: sadlak vs Springfield 4th gen steel mount.
About the only difference I can see in the two is that the Springfield is cut out in center and the Sadlak rail runs full length. Any problems with ejected casings hitting the sadlak rail?