scoping a Scout Squad to scoping standard M1A

[TexasPatriot.308]

I own a standard loaded SIA but don't want to go thru the headache of cheek piece etc. I hear scoping a Scout Squad is simpler, any input from those of yall that know. thanks.

 

[Archaic Weapon]

Scout scoping can be easier, and has it's own advantages and disadvantages. Scout scouts, due to distance from the eye, have a smaller field of view than a normal scope. To compensate, tradition states that proper technique is to keep both eyes open, one to find the target, one to zoom in on it. Scout scopes are lower magnification than normal scopes, but I have seen some that get up to 6x and maybe a little up past that (expensive).

They are, however, easier to mount to a rifle. They can usually be added without removing the irons from the gun, one of the main reasons the scout scope was invented in the first place. Think of it as expanding your iron sight range as opposed to sniping your gun up. They are supposed to be able to get on target faster, somewhere in between irons and optics. They will extend your easy shooting range. That's about all I got.

 

[Archaic Weapon]

I ran a scope on my scout rifle, but I took it off because I needed more practice with a scope to match what I can do with irons. I found that the scout scope was closer to the handling and shooting characteristics I was used to than a non scout scope, for what all that is worth.

 

[TexasPatriot.308]

but can you get by without a cheek piece on the scout squad?

 

[Archaic Weapon]

I did. I have a Ruger Gunsite Scout, and it was just like using the irons. Scout scopes are also made to have a low profile to aid in that. I cannot say 100% about what you are running, but that has been my sole experience with them. I will worn you though, expect to get flack from both the iron sights guys and the scope guys, as neither will consider your choice the right one. It's quite odd.

 

[Archaic Weapon]

Another way to look at it, a scout scope will sit in the same place at the same basic height as a red dot, if that helps. I had an old one lying around that has a quick detach mount, went and threw it on just to be sure. Threw it up to my shoulder, and instead of irons I saw a glowing dot.

 

[hang fire]

I have long been a proponent of scout rifles and having made a few up, feel they certainly have a place alongside my other rifles.

http://hstrial-rchambers.homestead.com/early.html#

 

[Archaic Weapon]

You can google images the setup in question, and see people shooting them with scout scopes, no cheek piece. That help?

 

[Narwhal]

Yes the scout can be setup with a pistol scope and does not need a cheek piece. I used a Burris 2-7x pistol scope and head pretty great results.

The downside is that the scope and mount sitting way out there on the barrel starts to cause the rifle to be very front heavy.

 

[Averageman]

When looking for a Scout Scope for my Tanker Garand, I researched it quiet a bit to get the exact eye relief needed. I ended up going with the Burris Scout Scope 2x7x32.
Good Scope, but the wait for it to come from Burris through Optics Planet seemed like forever, but they had the best price and no one else had one in stock.
You may end up still needing a cheek piece to get the right height you need depending on your stock, scope and rings. They really arent that hard to make, but they make a great difference when shooting. If you don't have a good cheek weld, even if it is off a little bit it can make shooting unplesant and accuracy less than your potential.
Yes your rifle will be very different and front heavy, perhaps nopt as quick to trasition to a second target.
If I was doing another M1A and had the money I might just go with a Trijicon and see how that works.

 

[TexasPatriot.308]

think some people misunderstood my question, I was referring to the Springfield Armory M1A standard rifle as opposed to the Scout Squad version. I realize the standard version requires a cheek piece but I often see pics of the scout squad with a standard looking scope, not a forward mounted scout scope and no cheek piece. just wondering if you need different height mounts and rings like a Bassett or Sadlak.

 

[X-Rap]

So far as I know they are the same in the receiver as well as the stock so I would say that the cheek riser would be needed on the SS too. Mine has the forward mounted scope but I'm not aware of any special SS receiver mounted scope mount, just the standard height/style.

 

[desidog]

I own a standard loaded SIA

Is it a "Loaded" model? If so, the barrel is thicker, so the scout mounts won't work...but that's not what you want...you want a scope in the usual scope place on a M1A Scout/Squad rifle, right?

There is no difference in the receivers, so same rings, etc. The only real difference is the barrel length; and the forward rail on the Scout; which, if i recall correctly, is made of aluminum, and bolted onto the steel barrel, and some people had issues with it moving or loosening.

 

[Narwhal]

think some people misunderstood my question, I was referring to the Springfield Armory M1A standard rifle as opposed to the Scout Squad version. I realize the standard version requires a cheek piece but I often see pics of the scout squad with a standard looking scope, not a forward mounted scout scope and no cheek piece. just wondering if you need different height mounts and rings like a Bassett or Sadlak.

There is pretty much no way to get a good cheek weld on an M1A/M14 with a standard receiver mounted scope and a standard stock without a cheek riser. I have tried the lowest basset mount and the lowest rings I could find and it still won't work consistently without the riser. The scoped M1A either needs a riser or an aftermarket stock with a higher comb/built-in riser - Bottom line - exception being the forward mounted long eye relief optics.

Of course you're welcome to try it without a riser and see if you can make it work - but I'm sure you'll find that the reticle is blurry because your face is floating around while you're trying to aim.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I am running the original 2.75X Burris Scout scope from the 1990s on my Scout Squad using low profile Warne Weaver/Picatinny QD mounts. The front sight was in my way and I removed it but the aperture sight was not in the way when turned down.

I am now using a Burris Fastfire III micro red dot as a backup mounted in place of the rear aperture sight and the co-witness is decent enough that the horizontal field of view is not diminished and the vertical only slightly.

At one time I was contemplating mounting my EOTech on the scout rail and my magnifier on a stripper clip mount but have binned that project for now. I'm not sure the vertical alignment of the two rails will be within the adjustable alignment range of the magnifier without some careful choice of mismatched riser heights. I also wonder about the heat on the EOTech as well.

Mike

PS. Narwhal is right. A cheek riser is a necessity withe the M1A and any kind of scope.

 

[Averageman]

Scout Squad

Basset mount and a riser I built. Makes all the difference in the world.

 

[dprice3844444]

leatherwood 2x7 also scout scope

 

[Averageman]

"Tanker" Scout.

And yes I will put a riser on this one as soon as possible

 

[Welding Rod]

I put a Luepold 2.5x on my Socom. I didn't like it at all. It totally fouled up the balance of the gun , plus it was too high for a good cheek weld even though I had the lowest rings possible.

The only optic I thought was ok was a Aimpoint T-1. It mounted low enough and was light enough to not be offensive out front.

Even so, I took it off. In my mind the this platform just isn't a good fit for optics.

 

[fragout]

Note: The M1A std, and Scout will both mount up the same way at the same height....as both use the same receiver and bbl contour.

The mount with te lowest profile I have tried to date is this:

http://ultimak.com/m8.htm

No need for any cheek riser with the above mount in my case, but your milage might vary.

In the end, I didnt like it, as it shifted the center of balance on the rifle too far fwd, making it feel awkward and front heavy.


The factory scout mount was not as bad regarding balance, but enough front heavy feeling to it once the optic was mounted that I sold it off as well.

Note: Both fwd mounts mentioned above will work with a std contour/profile bbl, but not with a medium or heavy bbl. Your M1A standard and Scout can both be utilized with either.

After trying out several different types of receiver mounts, along with an LRB Arms M25, Im liking the ARMS #18 the best out of them. It provides for the lowest profile receiver mount that I have found so far, plus it is a very stable mount ifn's it is installed right.

I also end up with a bigger selection of optics to choose from by using a receiver mount..... not to mention NVS.

What optic are you looking at so far for your Scout?

 

[TexasPatriot.308]

right now, both my M1As are irons only, but am leaning toward a Burriss Fullfield II in 4.5x14x44 with the AO. I want to get more range out of this .308 round than a red dot, EOTech etc. when you add a magnifier you add quite a few more $$$ if you want quality optics and I do believe in quality optics, I stay away from cheap junk like BSA, NCstar etc.

 

[fragout]

The reason I asked is because the larger the optic is, the more heigth you'll need to clear the rifle. (Handguard, and rear sight)..

I have had a 3-9x32mm scope (1in tube) at 1/16th of an inch clear of the rear sight aperture as it sits bottomed out......... while mated up with a pr of low rings.

Eye relief was there, but it was close.

Didnt need a cheek riser either, but this was very close.

The optic your looking at will very much likely require med heigth rings..... and you'll most likely need a riser of some type in the end.

I'm like you in that I dont like them either, but Averageman's set up looks interesting.

Good luck with your optics plan.