Vern Humphrey
Member
The .243 is simply the .308 (or 7.62X51 NATO) necked down. It has the same footprint -- same headsize, same length receiver required, and so on. Why go to the .243 when you already have the battle-proven 7.62X51 NATO?
Why is M14/M1A making a come back?
- Thread starter LexusNexus
- Start date
- Status
The .243 is simply the .308 (or 7.62X51 NATO) necked down. It has the same footprint -- same headsize, same length receiver required, and so on. Why go to the .243 when you already have the battle-proven 7.62X51 NATO?
The rumour is that the British 5.56 was lower power than US 5.56 because the bullpup would destruct shooting the US spec stuff. Well, low and behold I bought some Radway Green SS109 and sure enough it had much lower muzzle velocity than US. Did they change this? If they did, I'd buy more of it, clean ammo on strippers and bandoleers.
Too many people simply don't understand that price doesn't have a darn thing to do with cost other than it ought to be higher.
I'd bet a sizable chunk of my annual salary that SA's prices on the various models of M1A they sell are exactly what the market and their capacity to build them will bear and the market seems willing to bear those $1200 to $2000+ price tags that SA attaches.Enough people are obviously willing to pay what SA wants that SA feels no pressure at all to lower their price.
Me too my friend - me too...
Devonai
Member
I only bought a M1 Garand (SA 1942, $650) because I couldn't afford a M1A. Now I'll never look back.
A M1 in good condition should be a serious contender for the rifleman who may be considering a M1A but is turned off by the price. It seems to me that neither rifle is a good choice for sustained covering fire, so if that's in your mission profile you would be better served with an AR-15 or another magazine-fed 5.56mm semi-auto.
Yes, I know you can get 30-round magazines for the M1A, but if you're planning on covering fire, 5.56mm will serve just as well and you can carry much more of it.
Slap a M1D-style flash hider on your Garand, and I believe you will be well-served for any tactical engagement that does not involve over-penetration issues or extensive fire-and-maneuver.
A M1 in good condition should be a serious contender for the rifleman who may be considering a M1A but is turned off by the price. It seems to me that neither rifle is a good choice for sustained covering fire, so if that's in your mission profile you would be better served with an AR-15 or another magazine-fed 5.56mm semi-auto.
Yes, I know you can get 30-round magazines for the M1A, but if you're planning on covering fire, 5.56mm will serve just as well and you can carry much more of it.
Slap a M1D-style flash hider on your Garand, and I believe you will be well-served for any tactical engagement that does not involve over-penetration issues or extensive fire-and-maneuver.
They are great rifles and what I feel are worth the price. A new M1A will cost in the neighborhood of 1200.00 and up depending on where you can find one and what you want. Take a look at the DSA FAL's. They aren't cheap either and they start out at close to the same amount. Plus they are built from parts kits. I sold off alot of guns to buy my M1A and have not regretted it since. I've always wanted one and instead of saving up for one, I would buy some B.S. gun to satisfy a gun purchase craving. I did that about four times. My safe filled up with a bunch of those B.S. guns that I bought instead of saving up for the M1A. I didn't even shoot those guns anymore. I sold all of them off and guess what, I now have my M1A and I love it.
Flip
Flip
The M14 (yeah, I know, "M1A") is a classic because, like the DC-3, it is more than the sum of its parts. Had it been around in 1944, Patton would have called the M14 "the greatest battle implement". It has range, power, and accuracy in a proven package, and does all things passably well; some superbly well.
I was a young grunt when the M16 was new and viewed it with a jaundiced eye. Used them off and on thereafter and had a CAR-15 before M4s became cool. am currently acquiring another, but it is a niche weapon as far as I am concerned.
When in doubt I would opt for the M1A (heck, even an M1!) because I think it would take better care of me.
I was a young grunt when the M16 was new and viewed it with a jaundiced eye. Used them off and on thereafter and had a CAR-15 before M4s became cool. am currently acquiring another, but it is a niche weapon as far as I am concerned.
When in doubt I would opt for the M1A (heck, even an M1!) because I think it would take better care of me.
06
Member
My nephew is in the sandbox and using a 14. Mine is a Norinco but is as accurate as the ones I carried in the Corps. They are fine rifles. The 223 is a fine round but the 51 is better at penetrating cover if needed. 06(of course if it was chambered in 30-06 it would be better).
Vern Humphrey
Member
I've carried both the M1 and M14 in combat -- and, crusty old bastard that I am, I like the .30-06 better -- especially AP for combat use.
The age of the design doesn't mean it's got anything wrong with it.
Hell, the AR dates back nearly as far; the military just took a while to adopt it because it didn't seem much like a rifle. The AK dates to 1947, and it was the next step from the SKS, which is even older.
The 1911 is a much older design than any of the above, and it's still used, too. The 870 dates to 1950; the 500 dates to 1961. They also are used by the military, in one form or another.
Firearms are a mature product. They haven't changed so much in the last 50 years. The M1A is an updated version of a 1950s rifle design. But so is the AR. The first one was built in 1955 and tested by the military in 1956.
Hell, the AR dates back nearly as far; the military just took a while to adopt it because it didn't seem much like a rifle. The AK dates to 1947, and it was the next step from the SKS, which is even older.
The 1911 is a much older design than any of the above, and it's still used, too. The 870 dates to 1950; the 500 dates to 1961. They also are used by the military, in one form or another.
Firearms are a mature product. They haven't changed so much in the last 50 years. The M1A is an updated version of a 1950s rifle design. But so is the AR. The first one was built in 1955 and tested by the military in 1956.
azredhawk44
Member
I bought mine last year as a "Congratulations on that new job" present to myself.
I haven't been able to feed it as much as I would like, maybe a total of 1000 rounds or so. About 5-6 trips out is all. Work is now too demanding.
But it is a sweet rifle. I have the M1A Scout 18" model. I am considering a Fulton Armory National Match rifle too, as well as a CMP M1 Garand.
I love the action, I love the sights, and I love the fact that I don't have half a dozen M1913 Picatinny rails all over the damn thing. I love that I can pop a 5-round magazine into it and hunt with the same gun I go target shooting or plinking.
I am disappointed in only one set-back the gun has... that's the weight of bullet it can fire.
I've never tried to load anything outside of the 147gr - 175gr acceptable weights of bullets, but there are several I'd like to be able to use.
I think Sierra's 110gr Varminter hollowpoint would be fun to shoot from the .308 M1A/M14, but I am not sure if the action would have sufficient pressure to fully cycle. It would absolutely ruin a coyote's day, and would make a FANTASTIC short range personal defense round for a semiauto rifle that could otherwise cycle the cartridge.
And I think that the host of 180gr bullets out there for larger game such as elk, black bear, and other large game that CAN be taken with the .308 cartridge would be nice to be able to shoot in the M1A/M14 platform. But, this generates too much pressure in the gas system and can bend the operating rod.
So, I buy 3 types of bullets: 147-150gr FMJ berdan-primed surplus cartridges for silly plinking (pop cans and junk shooting), 168gr HPBT match bullets for it for precision accuracy, and 165gr SoftPoint bullets for hunting and more "serious" plinking. I'm not under-"gunned" for elk, but I may be under-bulleted due to the restrictions on bullet weight.
But, even with that one limitation on its use in one specific instance (which it really wasn't designed for), I would never get rid of it. It's a fantastic rifle, with a fantastic means of operation. I want all of its variants for my collection.
I haven't been able to feed it as much as I would like, maybe a total of 1000 rounds or so. About 5-6 trips out is all. Work is now too demanding.
But it is a sweet rifle. I have the M1A Scout 18" model. I am considering a Fulton Armory National Match rifle too, as well as a CMP M1 Garand.
I love the action, I love the sights, and I love the fact that I don't have half a dozen M1913 Picatinny rails all over the damn thing. I love that I can pop a 5-round magazine into it and hunt with the same gun I go target shooting or plinking.
I am disappointed in only one set-back the gun has... that's the weight of bullet it can fire.
I've never tried to load anything outside of the 147gr - 175gr acceptable weights of bullets, but there are several I'd like to be able to use.
I think Sierra's 110gr Varminter hollowpoint would be fun to shoot from the .308 M1A/M14, but I am not sure if the action would have sufficient pressure to fully cycle. It would absolutely ruin a coyote's day, and would make a FANTASTIC short range personal defense round for a semiauto rifle that could otherwise cycle the cartridge.
And I think that the host of 180gr bullets out there for larger game such as elk, black bear, and other large game that CAN be taken with the .308 cartridge would be nice to be able to shoot in the M1A/M14 platform. But, this generates too much pressure in the gas system and can bend the operating rod.
So, I buy 3 types of bullets: 147-150gr FMJ berdan-primed surplus cartridges for silly plinking (pop cans and junk shooting), 168gr HPBT match bullets for it for precision accuracy, and 165gr SoftPoint bullets for hunting and more "serious" plinking. I'm not under-"gunned" for elk, but I may be under-bulleted due to the restrictions on bullet weight.
But, even with that one limitation on its use in one specific instance (which it really wasn't designed for), I would never get rid of it. It's a fantastic rifle, with a fantastic means of operation. I want all of its variants for my collection.
30Cal
Member
I shoot a 125gr TNT over IMR4895 for 200yds doing a lazy 2430fps. The M1A cycles it just fine. It cost me 17¢ a pop to shoot these. Prone w/ Iron sights.
I believe Smith Enterprise, Inc. can ream your chamber to shoot the heavier bullets. Being they are busy with another customer, there may be a wait time.
...
...
If 180's are all you need, just get the adjustable gas plug from creedmore and go to town, its not like your going to be shooting thousands of them. Heck, I wouldn't be concerned about shooting 180s in an M1A without the adjustable gas plug, I just wouldn't shoot them by the hundreds.
My Dad trained with the M14 and was issued the M16 in Vietnam. He prefers the M14, but he said he did appreciate the low rifle and ammo weight when doing patrols in their camp area. He said he would rather go hungry rather than run out of ammo on a patrol. He still prefers the M14 for plinking and likes the sights. The peep sight with the ears on the front sight really help him center things up even though his vision isn't what it used to be. M14s are tough rifles.
If you need GI surplus mags, I believe Armalite is still selling their stock of them for $25 per.
If you need GI surplus mags, I believe Armalite is still selling their stock of them for $25 per.
- Status
