What makes M1A/M14 so expensive?

[madcratebuilder]

The SAI comes in several models. Stocks can be aftermarket or usgi. The receiver is cast then machined, bolt is forged, barrels can be usgi, Wilson or Douglas, std or NM. Older models may have more usgi parts than newer models. A usgi op-rod is desirable but I have never seen a SAI cast op-rod fail. I think the cheapest have to go is buy a standard and unitize the GB, ream the FS, then bed the stock. Mine shoots moa when I do my job.

 

[Ash]

Mine was not bad, was very reliable, but accuracy was disappointing. It shot better than my Hakim but not as good as my Garand and about the same as my FAL. It should have been at least as good as the M1. When I down-sized, I had the choice of keeping the FAL or M1a. I still have an FAL.

Of course, these days, FAL's have gotten expensive, too.

Ash

 

[H2O MAN]

kimberfan

h2o man

what brand of stock is that tan one?

and how much do they go for?

That is a USGI synthetic I purchased from FRED's it has the Rigid Rail Modification (RRM).
It has a real tight fit and shoots tight groups - Unfortunately, RRM is no longer available.

Ash

The synthetic stock, at least on the one I had, was a modified USGI.
The modification was terrible because the texture they use will chafe your face when firing.

The finish on these is as smooth as a babies ash.

 

[tinygnat219]

I think it can be summed up pretty well here:

It's Demand for a well-made semi-auto rifle in the good old fashioned .30 Caliber partly fueled by Nostalgia of those that have actually held an M-14, and partly by those that hate the 5.56 NATO round and the AR-15 platform.

 

[silverlance]

the high cost of the m14 is because there is no other semi auto rifle out there that is readily available that can achieve that kind of accuracy using a 30 caliber round.

the PSG1 would be nice but that's not available...
the Walther 2000 would be nice but that's $25000
the Barett M82 A1 would be nice but that's $8500

 

[Coronach]

The AR-10 won't shoot comparably to an M1A? I admit not having any experience with one, but I was under the impression that the AR-10 was at least capable of the same level of accuracy as your standard M14 clone.

Mike

 

[tallpaul]

The ar10 types are more accurate overall from what the guys who have em are experiencing... not as reliable though in a combat setting from what others say. I know several guys with the ar-10's that drive tacks with them. I also know quite a few M1A shooters who can shoot well but it tends to cost alot more to do so. Also scopin the ar is an easier and very sturdy when done.

I'd still like a couple m1a's

I only have a PTR 91 for my semi .308 though. I have shot the others. I would buy any of em really if I had the opportunity and the money at the same time The ptr I bought new before the price increases relatively cheap- for once

 

[Wes Janson]

the high cost of the m14 is because there is no other semi auto rifle out there that is readily available that can achieve that kind of accuracy using a 30 caliber round.

the PSG1 would be nice but that's not available...
the Walther 2000 would be nice but that's $25000
the Barett M82 A1 would be nice but that's $8500

Err, wot? Of the three you list, only one is a semi-auto .30 cal. Of the others, one is a bolt-action, and the other is a .50 BMG anti-material rifle. The PSG1 is an obscenely expensive and rarely seen rifle that's basically irrelevant.

On the other hand, we currently have, by and large, the M1A, FAL, PTR-91, and the AR-10. Hopefully within another year we'll be able to add the SCAR-H, RFB, and the Massoud to that list. Considering the options though, pretty much any American-made semi-auto .308 is going to run over $1k, and usually closer to $1.5k.

 

[cracked butt]

Springfield can charge pretty much anything they want for their M1A. There are very few players in the M14 business and Sprinfield is the cheapest of the bunch. There's no reason whatsoever for Springfield to charge less unless we are allowed to import $500 Norincos again.

 

[Mk VII]

AS the DoD is highly unlikely to ever sell M14s to the American public, there is no baseline of surplus bargain ones to anchor the price down. Plus a lot of people seem to want one, and are prepared to pay what is demanded for it.

 

[aka108]

Would imagine that product liability insurance is pretty expensive and add more than a buck or two to the final price.

 

[Seafarer12]

Personally I think M-14 are all hype. They arent bad but they arent great. I never cared for them that much. I use to have to qualify with one every year. I think the FAL is a better rifle.

 

[aloharover]

the high cost of the m14 is because there is no other semi auto rifle out there that is readily available that can achieve that kind of accuracy using a 30 caliber round.

Actually you can build an AR that will shoot just as well, for less money, and it will shoot longer between tuneups.

pretty much any American-made semi-auto .308 is going to run over $1k, and usually closer to $1.5k.

Uhm, you can get a NIB DPMS 308 with case, cleaning gear, 2 mags, and a sling for <$900

AS the DoD is highly unlikely to ever sell M14s to the American public, there is no baseline of surplus bargain ones to anchor the price down. Plus a lot of people seem to want one, and are prepared to pay what is demanded for it.

Do a little research on what the Clinton administration did to most of the inservice M14s.

 

[kcmarine]

Basically, it's the rifleman's rifle. It's not as... "intimidating"... to the shooter as perhaps an AR-10 would be. And as far as I know... AR-10s are more expensive and aren't standardized.

 

[H2O MAN]

Seafarer12

Personally I think M-14 are all hype. They arent bad but they arent great.
I never cared for them that much. I use to have to qualify with one every year.

I can personally attest to the fact that the current M14 lives up to the hype.
The current platform benefits from modern stocks, parts and build processes.
More brand new mil spec parts become available just about every month.
The modernized M14 is an ultra reliable, extremely accurate battle rifle.

Seafarer, it's worth another look

 

[Wibb]

Those are some beautiful weapons H20 Man. My father-in-law has a couple of them and after shooting them many times, I have to say it is one of the finest weapons I have ever had the pleasure of shooting. I keep my eyes open for a good deal on them all the time. The laws of supply and demand can do some crazy things.

 

[Ash]

The Military fiberglass stocks are indeed smooth. What Springfield Armory does to them that gives them that textured finish is what I hate. I'm pretty underwhelmed with the basic M1a. Great, solid rifles but for the money, not nearly accurate enough. Of course, they are as accurate, if not more so, than any real SVD out there and half the price. But, well, perhaps it was mine but it was not just super accurate. It was in the 2 MOA range, sometimes less, sometimes more. Certainly battle accurate, but my CMP Garand was always more accurate, and that disappointed me. When my Imbel FAL was just as accurate, it seemed to me that if I was to get rid of one, the M1a would have to go.

Ash

 

[BozemanMT]

Perfection costs money.

 

[Andrewsky]

Ash I guess I don't see what the big deal is with the stocks.

I got a nice USGI Birch for $35 and have a $65 USGI Synthetic on the way.

Also SAI has changed the finish on their stocks. The old SOCOMs feel much different than my newer M1As.

 

[ATAShooter]

 

[H2O MAN]

Yes Sir !!

 

[Ash]

There is no big deal with the stocks. Replacement stocks work great. I went that route myself. The deal was that the finish that SA put on the USGI fiberglass stocks would rub your cheek raw after only a few rounds down the pipe. I didn't like what they did to it. They would have been far better leaving the stock alone than to apply what ever kind of finish they used.

In any case, I don't have a problem. Heck, I don't mind folks liking the M1a. Mine may have been an aberration. I certainly will not tell others not to buy.

Ash

 

[cpttango30]

It is more on your market than anything else. I have been to two different gun stores about 20 miles apart where I live. They each had a m1a that were exactly the same. Only place wanted $1899 or it the other wanted $1499 for it. The more expensive place also has a 700SPS for $999 and that ugly 700XVR for $1500 the other store have them for $759 and $799. Go figure the more expensive store had plenty of business.

 

[Wes Janson]

Uhm, you can get a NIB DPMS 308 with case, cleaning gear, 2 mags, and a sling for <$900

I'm looking at RSR's 2008 catalogue right now, and DPMS's website, and I see suggested retail of the LR-308 models ranging from $1154 to $2104. $900 before tax might be possible once in a long, long while if you get really lucky somehow, but I'd say is pretty much outside the realm of likelihood. $900 for a used model is more likely.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

When you think...hmmm...the CMP has M1 Garands for 500 bucks---it's not a bad thing to ask hard questions about WHAT you need that M1a to do for you that a Garand can't. Answers will vary, but the platforms are far more similar than they are different (although they DO differ without a doubt). But they are mostly equal in:
-weight and length (full size)
-reliability under adverse condition and (general) durability
-battlefield accuracy <600m (beyond that, .308 may have a technical advantage in the M-1a)
-round-for-round power; (M-1 in .30/06 has a slight edge)
-primary operational characteristics apart from initial loading and charging

The M-1 limits you in capacity and is less refined than its replacement; but it is a true bargain right now. Original examples are (arguably) more durable in terms of receiver longevity than the SA m1a's (and their m1's also). But that debate will go on for at least the next 100 years or longer---and THAT is what makes either choice solid as hell; the SA's come with a lifetime warranty.