SOCOM II vs Standard M14

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lonestar

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
701
I'm checking out the selection of rifles at Springfield Armory and I'm looking at getting (when I get the money, which is going to be a while) either a Standard M1A which is an almost copy of the military M14, or the SOCOM II, which is a M14 with a 16 inch barrel, the infamous M14L.

I have shot hunting type rifles before, but I'm not a big rifle guy. I want to buy a, end all, be all, battle rifle that is not 5.56. This may be the only long gun that I own and I really want to go with the 16" barreled SOCOM II, but am I losing a lot of accuracy with the reduced barrel. Also any problems with SOCOM II or the M1A
 
If I could only have one .308 for all my high power rifle needs, it wouldn't have a 16" barrel.

I think the SOCOM is better than a sharp stick, but that's about it.

If you could only have one "battle rifle", a FN-FAL, 7 or 8mm Mauser, 1917, or 1903 would all be better choices, being much more versatile.

John
 
Having used the standard M14 in combat (the accurized pre-M21 version), I'll say the standard rifle is the way to go. Why go to 7.62 if you're going to throw away velocity and energy -- not to mention the effect on your ears?
 
If you're looking for a true 'battle rifle' buy an M1 Garand. Chances are that the Garand you buy was actually used in a battle. An M1A or a SOCOM was made by Springfield Inc, NOT The Springfield Armory, for the commercial market.

If you're looking for a SHTF gun that'll work when you need it to, all the time, and won't break the bank to shoot it , buy an AK.
 
16" .308s aren't as bad as they're made out to be. Average velocity loss from a 20" barrel is roughly 150 feet per second, depending on the load.

What they are is really handy. When I had my FAL rebarreled, I went from a 21" barrel with a long brake to a 16.25" barrel with a short combo device, an alloy lower, and a shortened stock.

The rifle is now five inches shorter and a pound lighter. It's quite a bit handier, especially in tight quarters. It's faster to shoulder as well.

Now, if you're going to get an intermediate carbine for your short ranged stuff, then by all means, get a full length .308 rifle. But the FAL carbine is my only rifle right now. Down the road, though, I'm planning on a Medium Contour and doing up my own DMR.

The problem with the SOCOM II, I think, is with the full rails and everything on there it's so heavy that the shorter OAL advantage is nearly neutralized by the increase in weight.

Or, of course, you can split the difference and get the 18" Scout-Squad.



(Of course, my other idea is to get an 11" FAL OSW and suppress it. :evil: )


An M1A or a SOCOM was made by Springfield Inc, NOT The Springfield Armory, for the commercial market.
Click to expand...

Any clone/copy of an AK, FAL, M14, M16, or G3 you're going to buy was 'made for the commercial market'. I don't see that being an issue, personally.
 
I'm skeptical on the SOCOM II.

Check the weight: all the rail/geegaw carp adds like an extra POUND to an already heavy rifle.

IMO, 18" is a better compromise length for a .308 barrel, so I'd look into either the standard, or the scout squad, which was my pick.

And incidentally, barrel length is primarily related to muzzle velocity, rather than accuracy.
 
The Scout Squad seems like a good combo of features, to me.

Point of reference: I was sighting in a .30-06 for hunting yesterday, and it's got a 24" barrel. Total gun weight, with scope and rings, is pushing 9 lb.; add a few more ounces with the Super Sling on it. That makes it about the same weight as the Scout Squad, but 2 lb. lighter than the SOCOM II.

My rifle is 44.5" long, but I never thought, "Man, this thing is LONG!" I did think, "Man, this thing is kinda heavy." The Scout Squad is 4" shorter.

The Scout Squad is 2 lb. lighter than the Socom II, a few hundred bucks cheaper, with better velocity and less muzzle blast, and it comes with what is probably the only rail you'll ever use on a .308. .308 is not a pistol round.:)

In my uninformed opinion, the SOCOM II is aimed at the California Tacticool market, where lots people have money for guns but can't legally buy most other modern semiauto replicas of military weapons. Those things sell well here. I won't comment on how well a lot of the "gotta have it" crowd here can shoot.:p
 
I made this decision a year or so back

When I was thinking of a new M1A, I had to think of this same: M1A "Loaded" or SOCOM 16.

If one rifle were all I could have, it would be the "Loaded", not for velocity though that is for fact considerably lessoned. The SOCOM I or II neither possess even close to the accuracy standards of the run-of-the-mill M1A. When I e-mailed Springfield, they advised me that they consider the achievement of 4" groups at 100 yards as good. I say it's shocking! For me, MOA is the worst I will accept. Ergo, I went with the M1A "Loaded" fiberglass. This rifle can be used for deer, boar, defense, etc.

Just my .02c.

Doc2005
 
I didn't used to have much use for short rifles either. Then I spent a year doing vehicle searches with a 40" M16 hanging off of me. Many a government owned vehicle got a nice "Dyncorp was here!" ding in the fender from the front sight post.

Long rifles are fine when you're outside and are on foot. When you operate out of a vehicle or have to go through doorways, shorter weapons become handier. So it depends on your own specific mission requirements, I guess. Best solution, of course, is to get both. :D
 
True enough.

However, a Mini-30 would be a far better choice, if it's true that a SOCOM shoots 4 MOA.

It's much cheaper, much lighter, much handier, and much shorter (even without the addition of a readily available folding stock).

If you can't hit anything past 200 yards, 7.62x39 is a better choice, since it has a lot less recoil, blast and flash.
 
I will agree with the assessments of the SOCOM 2. It is so front heavy, that unless you are shooting from bags or from a X-pod, it really is as useless as you can get.

The socom 1 on the other hand is a joy to shoot, I have shot it in class- up to 3000 rounds in a three day class and only one hiccup from a known bad mag. One can argue sight radius, but the 21" barrel is for a different purpose. One can argue +/- MOA, but a 16 inch barrel is not being shot for most uses, but off hand. Dropping 150 (confirmed with my chrono) in FPS is not a big deal.

It is easier to carry 180 rounds of 5.56, than 100 rounds of 7.62. There is no need to double tap the skinnies.

I like the way the socom feels. I shoot it accurately and for the punch it gives, I shot it fast. Dis'in it because it is not the traditional package is silly. Try one.

I bet you will want one... even if it makes you tacticool.
 
Another vote for the standard rifle. If working constantly in close quarters, then I might consider the Scout Squad under duress. The Socoms are not handy, particularly the II with all the inronmongery up front.

I have shot the M14 and M1As off and on for years, and the only things I would change at this point would be my eyeballs. Fortunately Trijicon is working on a 3X20 compact ACOG for 7.62 so happy times will be here again.
 
The Scout Squad is 2 lb. lighter than the Socom II, a few hundred bucks cheaper, with better velocity and less muzzle blast, and it comes with what is probably the only rail you'll ever use on a .308. .308 is not a pistol round.
Click to expand...

Plus 1
The Scout is the better comprimise, the SOCOM II especially is heavy, the Scout is light and nimble and works well with standard sights or whatever you want to put on.
 
This may be the only long gun that I own and I really want to go with the 16" barreled SOCOM II, but am I losing a lot of accuracy with the reduced barrel.
Click to expand...

With a 16" barrel you're giving up a couple hundred feet per second of muzzle velocity compared to a full length rifle. On my DSA para FAL with 16" barrel this does not seem to make any real difference compared to my full length Rhodie parts kit gun at combat sort of ranges (out to 400 meters or so). The 16" barrel is putting less thump on the target, but either rifle makes a steel chest plate gong quite nicely.

As for getting the SOCOM II or standard M1A or the other options, I'd guess the first question is what do you really want the rifle to do? A battle-rifle sort of range gun where you're going to be doing some real long range shooting with optics on the rifle? A real-world home defense gun or other CQB kind of applications? A little of this, a little of that?
 
I have a M1A black synthetic Scout/Squad and a Stag AR. Although the my M1A small, it is gigantic compaired to my Stag in terms of dimensions and balance. I held a SOCOM II and thought is was even more nose heavy than my Scout. If your set on getting an M1A I'd look into getting a scout/squad.

Flip.
 
I haven't used a chrono on any of these M1A rifles, so I am not attacking anyone with this, just speculating.....

But only a 150 fps loss for a .308 in a 16" barrel seems like an extremely conservative number. Is this comparing to a 20" barrel or a 24" barrel?


Anyway, I wouldn't buy a 16" barrel .308 for any reason. The 308 is best used as a rifle cartridge and real rifles don't come in 16" configurations. :p
An AR15 carbine would be better IMO for close quarter combat.
For medium to long range I would get whatever is the most accurate version of that M1A...if that is what you are set on. (not that accuracy directly involves barrel length, but every foot per second does help for those 300-1000 yard shots.)
 
I haven't used a chrono on any of these M1A rifles, so I am not attacking anyone with this, just speculating.....

But only a 150 fps loss for a .308 in a 16" barrel seems like an extremely conservative number. Is this comparing to a 20" barrel version of the same gun?
I would be interested in the actual fps, simply because it probably won't be close to what people would "generally" expect from a .308.


Anyway, I wouldn't buy a 16" barrel .308 for any reason. The 308 is best used as a rifle cartridge and real rifles don't come in 16" configurations. :p
An AR15 carbine would be better IMO for close quarter combat.
For medium to long range I would get whatever is the most accurate version of that M1A...if that is what you are set on. (not that accuracy directly involves barrel length, but every foot per second does help for those 300-1000 yard shots.)
 
Who here has experience with the SOCOM 16 and didn't like it? I can understand why the SOCOM II is a waste, but the 16 really seems like a nice platform, to me. The people I've spoken with who own one like them. So what's wrong with one?
 
But only a 150 fps loss for a .308 in a 16" barrel seems like an extremely conservative number. Is this comparing to a 20" barrel or a 24" barrel?
Click to expand...

I asked Denny Hansen from SWAT magazine about it. He compared a 20" AR-10 and a 16" FAL (from two different reviews, but using the same load.) Obviously, it'll vary from load to load, but you're not giving up a whole lot.

I've read some reviews of DSA's 11" FAL carbines. Even with an 11" barrel, the .308 still has more muzzle velocity than a 16" 7.62x39 (only about a hundred to a hundred and fifty feet per second or so, but still).
 
I just paid for a M1A loaded last week. Fiberglass stock w/ stainless steel barrel. I was debating between the Loaded or SOCOM 16 since they were the same price. I went with the full-size because this will be more of a recreational gun. I want it to be more accurate. I think the full-size rifle with stainless barrel looks cooler too :)

I wish I had my rifle so I can post pics, but Im still within my 10 day waiting period. This is longest 10 days of my life. :fire:

EDIT: Here is a SOCOM review.. http://www.gunsandammomag.com/long_guns/socom_012306/index.html
 
I've tried them both and I have to say that the m21 is awesome compared to the SOCCOM II.
Nothing wrong with the SOCCOM but given a choice it would be M21 all the way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Socom 16/II. Did this rifle realy get.....
Replies
21
Views
1K
Draven32
D
H
  • Locked
Springfield Scout or Socom?
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
AK103K
AK103K
A
  • Locked
ACOG on SOCOM II?
Replies
0
Views
426
ApexinM3
A
D
  • Locked
Springfield Armory SOCOM II
Replies
14
Views
1K
Browns Fan
B
Q
  • Locked
Springfield M1A standard vs Socom 16
Replies
11
Views
9K
Gunfighter123
G
Back
Top