Springfield M1A: any issues?

[Edarnold]

When you are talking about a gun that your life doesn't depend on, and that is going to cost you around $2000 when all is said and done, the most important feature is how it feels in your hands. Does the shape please the eye, does it come to your shoulder like it belongs there, does squeezing a shot off feel right? When you work the action, does it feel like the manufacturer cared about their product?

I was lucky enough to get the back-up M1A Supermatch from a Distinguished Marksman who was moving to the AR with his team. For $1800, the gun was new, 1994 manufacture. I shot it in matches until my eyesight deteriorated enough to put iron sights off my menu. I've handled a lot of AR-platform rifles, and shot a few. To me, they just don't feel right. The M1A will be with me until, to steal the phrase:"They pry it from my cold dead fingers"

 

[Matthew Courtney]

My Springfield M1A is a great gun. Shoots 2 MOA with ammo it likes and not over 3.25 MOA with everything I've put through it. Since It's not designed to be scoped, 2 MOA is plenty accurate given that I am about a 4 moa shooter with standard irons.

If I need to shoot dimes at 600 meters, I'll break out one of my scoped LR-308's.

 

[arthury]

Not designed for scope?

[...]Since It's not designed to be scoped, 2 MOA is plenty accurate given that I am about a 4 moa shooter with standard irons.
[...]

Could you or someone else throw more light on this, please?

 

[Matthew Courtney]

MIA's are not designed to be scoped. They are designed to be shot with the excellent open sights that they come with. While they can be scoped, it is difficult to do in a really solid way and even then the rifles great ergonomic features are compromised quite a bit for most shooters.

While AR-10's were not designed to be scoped originally either, removable carry handles combine with modularity to allow for easy, solid scope mounting in ways that maintain the ergonomic handling features of the rifle.

I love my M1A. It is my "bump in the night" home defense rifle. My vehicle rifles are AR-10 style flat tops with 1.5-5 Leupold scopes on them because of the chance of longer engagements.

 

[Matthew Courtney]

When you are talking about a gun that your life doesn't depend on, and that is going to cost you around $2000 when all is said and done, the most important feature is how it feels in your hands. Does the shape please the eye, does it come to your shoulder like it belongs there, does squeezing a shot off feel right? When you work the action, does it feel like the manufacturer cared about their product?

I was lucky enough to get the back-up M1A Supermatch from a Distinguished Marksman who was moving to the AR with his team. For $1800, the gun was new, 1994 manufacture. I shot it in matches until my eyesight deteriorated enough to put iron sights off my menu. I've handled a lot of AR-platform rifles, and shot a few. To me, they just don't feel right. The M1A will be with me until, to steal the phrase:"They pry it from my cold dead fingers"

"From my cold dead hands" is a phrase normally used to communicate that one is going to use the referenced firearm to fight to the death in defence of liberty itself. If one truly values liberty more than life, why would that person trust liberty to a rifle that they would not defend their life with?

Is the mental image of yourself so important that you would die with a particular rifle in your hands simply because that rifle was more pleasing to the eye? Is "feeling right" so much more important than preserving liberty for posterity that you would choose a less effective battle implement?

If you want to argue that an M1A would be a most effective rifle in your hands because you are more comfortable with it, for God's sake man, make that argument! But please choose to live as long as possible fighting the good fight to secure the blessings of liberty, rather than choosing to perish prematurely for the sake of nostalgia.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I've known many folks who've had them and they all have worked very well. In one instance the receiver was too tight where you insert the magazine and Springfield fixed it. IMO Springfield has top notch customer and will absolutely take care of you if there's an issue. Go for it. You will live it.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

My National at 100 yrds off the bench. 50 shots.

I find my National is harder to shoot well then my Super. My Super has a thick stock and it is easier to grasp and hold. The National has a mid weight barrel and normal stock and is a bit more whippy when you are sitting or kneeling. Obviously from standing it is harder to control than the Super.

No regrets, no real problems. I had to send the National back to SM when I got it because the rear sight was loose. It must have gotten bumped in shipping but I figured why should I fix it when it was brand new?

Great gun. No regrets, lots of fun to go prone with. What more can I say?

 

[asia331]

Swapped out a broken firing pin once in 37 years of regular shooting and some slight lateral play in a rear site; that's all. Great weapon. Very happy.

 

[Edarnold]

"From my cold dead hands" is a phrase normally used to communicate that one is going to use the referenced firearm to fight to the death in defence of liberty itself. If one truly values liberty more than life, why would that person trust liberty to a rifle that they would not defend their life with?

Is the mental image of yourself so important that you would die with a particular rifle in your hands simply because that rifle was more pleasing to the eye? Is "feeling right" so much more important than preserving liberty for posterity that you would choose a less effective battle implement?

If you want to argue that an M1A would be a most effective rifle in your hands because you are more comfortable with it, for God's sake man, make that argument! But please choose to live as long as possible fighting the good fight to secure the blessings of liberty, rather than choosing to perish prematurely for the sake of nostalgia.

I'm not sure where all this passion is coming from. My point was that although I have several guns that I would consider selling or trading, the M1A is not one of them.

As for: "Is "feeling right" so much more important than preserving liberty for posterity that you would choose a less effective battle implement?", I would direct your attention to the Mk 14 EBR and the M39 EBR, currently in service with the United States Marine Corps. Perhaps they chose to deploy these weapons out of nostalgia; personally, I think not. Thanks to rough men who stand guard defending us from those who would enslave us, you have the right to express your own opinion.

 

[jason41987]

best thing about the M1A... you can keep its standard wooden stock on and not look like another tacticool idiot with a decked out AR-15... and for the same barrel length, standard hardware, weighs about the same as an AR-10 (there just isnt much metal to a garand/M14 receiver, so most the rifle is just wood)

 

[Cosmoline]

Are there any issues or pains with the current M1A platform compared to the AR (or AR-10) platform?

Last year I got a Colt LE Carbine and this year I got an M1A squad scout. Surprisingly the Colt was virtually trouble-free. But so far I'm having some teething issues with the M1A. The gas vent wasn't adjusted properly, so I got short stroking. After an additional turn of the locking ring that was fixed. Now after about 100 rounds some surplus 7.62 is sticking in the chamber, about every other round. And on examination the chamber is extremely rough with visible grooves. I'm not sure if that's on purpose but it most certainly has a clinging effect on brass.

Another problem--component and replacement costs can be VERY HIGH. Sometimes shockingly so. And there's a very aggressive market for them. I've been outbid on three stocks so far on GB, each one a tiger strip and going for over $200. Simple replacement parts which on a Mosin would go for a few bucks cost hundreds with the M1A. Old M14 parts seem to be highly prized and subject to auction wars. Everything seems to be high priced, perhaps because the users are older men with more money. And maybe also because there's less competition among suppliers than for AR's. I haven't done a side-by-side breakdown of extra costs on the AR vs. the M1A, but I know I spent less on the AR. Retro front hand guards, new rear hand grip. Winter trigger guard. A few odds and ends. That's about it. I've already spent a few hundred on various stocks for the M1A and I haven't even started revamping it in earnest.

On the positive side, I'm finding the M1A in its proper M14 stock with proper steel buttplate to be much more comfortable to shoot in the stances than the wobbly barrel-light AR carbine. I'm getting the best 100 year off-hand groups of my life with that rifle, using only a hasty sling.

But I do expect to have more issues as I work out the bugs. I expect to be doing a bit of chamber polishing, retrofitting it with some mil spec M14 parts, shimming and upgrading the gas system, and glass bedding a surplus stock.

In short, the M1A doesn't seem to be the best choice for those who like everything to roll without trouble from the first shot. It's a firearm for tweaking.

I also agree that the M1A shines with its fantastic irons--evolved from the Garand. They're probably the best irons on any rifle I've shot. Scopes can be used on them, but if you want high mag you're better off with a flat top AR pattern .308. Scoping the M1A, you lose some of the magic of it IMHO. I tried out my scout scope mount, didn't like it and won't be using it again.

Another nice point is that if one stock doesn't work for you, swapping out is real fast and simple. There may be some point of impact change of course, but for example if you find that one stock is too thin in the wrist you can get a "big red" birch stock and fix that issue. Bedding makes it a bit more tricky, of course. I'm going to do my first bedding job on a beater, because the task is rather more complex than it is for a simple bolt action.
.