Springfield Socom 16 vs. .308 Ar

[cementmanjr]

i have a dillema on my hands. currently i have a bushmaster modular carbine, chambered in .223. i love it, but want a new rifle, preferrably in .308. i have heard good things about the socom 16, but never actually shot one. also was wondering if anyone has good or bad experience with any ar's chambered in .308. any input would be greatly appreciated. thanks for the help!!!!

 

[MechAg94]

I have a standard M1A. I don't know if I would compare the AR10's with the SOCOM. The SOCOM is a close quarter's rifle. I think of the AR10's as bench shooters first though I'm sure they aren't limited to that at all. I would think a match M14 style rifle would be a better comparrison.

 

[Deer Hunter]

If you want something that handles like your AR, you could get a FAL carbine that DSA makes. If it's not your cup of tea, I'm sure there's a FAL out there for you somewhere.

I'm a bit biasd, because I love FALs.

 

[nplant]

The Bushmaster BAR-10 is awesome. It's reliable, and uses FAL mags. It's WAAAAAY better than the real AR-10 models that I've been around (they are usually not at all reliable, with some people reporting multiple malfunctions in each mag run through the gun).

Unfortunately, Bushmaster no longer makes the gun. They can be found new still, or used, but they won't be around for long.

Good news is that it appears that Rock River Arms has picked up the design and will manufacture it as the RRA "LAR-10." They haven't been released for sale yet, but are coming soon. Looks interesting, but no history, yet.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The Bushmaster BAR-10 is awesome. It's reliable, and uses FAL mags.

How much experience do you have with the BAR-10? I notice you are in California and I was under the impression the BAR-10 was forbidden there.

I've never been able to get my hands on one; but several BAR-10 owners I talked to reported issues with the rifle not feeding reliably from all FAL mags and issues with broken bolts.

I've been eyeing .308 ARs for awhile; but every owner I talk to says the same thing - they are finicky about running correctly compared to the AR15.

 

[nplant]

How much experience do you have with the BAR-10? I notice you are in California and I was under the impression the BAR-10 was forbidden there.

You're right... as a Californian, I clearly am not to be trusted with evil rifles that have pistol grips that protrude below the receiver. But I get out to Nevada a few times a year, and a friend that lives there has one. I have found it enjoyable to shoot, and not had one malfunction with it. He reports never having any real trouble with his, and he's not a big fan of the AR-10 platform. He wouldn't keep a gun in his truck that wasn't reliable to the end. Also, reports from others I know in the real U.S. (read: not CA), say the same thing about their BAR-10s.
I wish I could give a better description of their reliability, but until you mentioned the reports of feeding troubles and broken bolts, I had not heard one negative comment on them.

Another point to make on the question of which to use is the weight of currently available M-14/M-1A's. Springfields are heavy mothers - even the shortest of them seem too heavy for their size. But they are reliable as long as you keep them free of any serious mud or sand.

If at all possible, I'd get an M-14 from Fulton Armory or another company besides Springfield, because you'll get something closer to original GI specs.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I've been eyeing .308 ARs for awhile; but every owner I talk to says the same thing - they are finicky about running correctly compared to the AR15.

I have an Armalite AR-10A2 carbine and with factory mags it has been extemely reliable. I have fed it anything from 110 gr. V-max's to 180 gr. Sierra BTSP with no issues feeding or extracting. However, I get an occasional jam on the last round when using modified 30-round G-3 magazines.

To the original question, it is a personal preference issue. Both rifles are robust, rugged and reliable. But the ergonomics are very different. For me, the AR-10 is better balanced and pulls up more naturally. I went with the A2 model, since a carbine is not a bench gun and the higher mounting position of the optical sight does not require me to move my face down. It is the most natural pointing long gun I own.

The other advatage is obvious. Eventually, I plan to pick up the AR-10(T) .300 RSAUM upper for it. You can also get .243 or custom .260 uppers

 

[geekWithA.45]

Well, given the finicky reputation of the AR form .308, and the almost unbreakable reliability of the M-14 form .308, I'd say an M1A is the way to go.

You have to appreciate it for what it is, however.

It's a battle rifle. It's job is to give you 2-4 moa that you can count on, come hell or high water.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

If money is no object, Leitner Wise introduced a piston-driven .308 AR at the 2006 SHOT Show. That might solve some of the finicky AR10 issues. You would likely be waiting a while for that one though. They aren't exactly known for speedy delivery and they seem to be concentrating on getting military contracts at the moment.

 

[MechAg94]

Another point to make on the question of which to use is the weight of currently available M-14/M-1A's. Springfields are heavy mothers - even the shortest of them seem too heavy for their size. But they are reliable as long as you keep them free of any serious mud or sand.

http://www.armalite.com/sales/catalog/rifles/ar10a4_spr.htm
http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-rifles-m1a-stan.shtml
http://www.rockriverarms.com/item-d...ge=r308std.gif&CFID=10428095&CFTOKEN=44113498

Armalite AR10A4 - 9.6 lbs. Springfield M1A - 9.2 lbs. RRA - 9.0 to 9.3 lbs. SOCOM 16 - 8.9 lbs
I don't see where the M1A is so heavy by comparrison.

I can't believe you are saying an M1A can't handle serious mud or sand while recommending AR style rifles.

That RRA rifle looks pretty cool though. Not so expensive either. I still like my M1A though.

 

[MarshallDodge]

I am considering the same...AR or M1A platform.

Since I am familiar with the AR platform I had decided to purchase the DPMS LR308. One of my customers has one and it has been 100% reliable and extremely accurate. The only thing he did was put in an aftermarket trigger to reduce the weight of pull.

Now that Rock River is coming out with one that takes FAL mags I may wait and see how their's perform.

DPMS just came out with another model that may interest you:
From their website

 

[nplant]

MechAg94: Not so much the weight by itself, but I've handled full-sized M-14s that were better balanced than M-1As, and thus feel lighter than, the Springfields, including the SOCOM rifles.

As for the mud and sand: Take a good military rifle, like an AK-47, and look at the original way its built. Tolerances? Who needs tolerances? The thing can be buried in wet sand at the beach for years, taken out, rinsed off, and a magazine can be shot through it. It won't hold a group as well as an AR rifle, but it will likely work. Take the blueprint for the AK, have an American Craftsman go over it and build one, you'll get the accuracy you want, but you probably won't be able to bury it at the beach and get it to function flawlessly time after time.

The difference is in tolerance. M-14s, Garands, lots of originally military rifles (not counting the M-16, unfortunately) have loose tolerances. Springfield caters to folks who crave a rifle that will outshoot them. They make a great gun, no question. I just would rather have a GI receiver and parts than a precision fit one, at any price, for the combat purposes which that style rifle was designed. In my opinion (yeah, yeah, everyone's got one), if you want accuracy and smoothness, go with a Remington 700 or a Winchester 70, tune it up, spray honey on a target and shoot flies at 200 yards.

 

[BRONZ]

Get both....sorry had to do it.

AR-308=good ergonomics(sp)
firends with several AR10's can't get them to run 99%=bad

M1a=harder to mount optics but will run and run and run.

my .02

 

[MechAg94]

nplant, If you want to talk AK's, that is a completely different story. I am sure even an accurized AK could out do an AR pattern rifle or others in reliability. The AK's design and the way the action and extractor works are just more robust. An accurized AK still has those features. I was just surprised you mentioned mud and sand on an M1A when the alternative discussed was an AR pattern rifle not an AK.

I have a standard M1A. I think it would do fine as long as stuff wasn't blocking the bolt. I haven't seen too many match grade M14's to know if they would be less reliable in the field or not. As far as Fulton Armory, I'm not sure I see where changing the material or fab method would make it resist mud and sand better in the short term. My Dad has an older Armscorp receiver as well as a couple other M14 rifles. The parts and the way it is put together are not substantially different on the M1A. The Fulton or LRB may be tougher, but I doubt they would shrug off sand and mud any better.

I agree that bolt actions are the way to go if you want same-hole accuracy, but the question was semi-auto only. Even my standard M1A shoots better than I do.

 

[nplant]

Well, in my experience, for a combat style rifle, the Springfields "feel" different. If your experience is different, I'll defer to you. I admittedly don't own either an M-14, M-1A, or AR-10 variant, and have only used them in the past. My intent was to relate what I've noticed, and hope that it helps someone.

 

[vgodenwa]

I have an M1A Scout. It works very well if you understand how to lube an M1A.
I think the Socom is a very good design, except it is a CQB rifle and the blast is pretty bad from the short barrel and muzzle brake. And I'm not sure it can be removed. So, I bought the Scout, removed the brake and put a GI flash hider on it and an XS front sight - very pleased.
A magazine writer was using a Bushmaster .308 at one of the Thunder Ranch classes I attended and had problems. It may have been a prototype.
I don't think you can go wrong with a M1A or DSA Fal.
Von