User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 4:20:46 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just ordered one.  +1 for another range report request. This one definitely has my attention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 4:51:48 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you go read what was at the link? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a Frankin M1A. Put together out of parts and assembled by anyone they can hire. The quality of the receiver and bolt may be top notch. Even the best. But that thing is never going to hold the value of a Springfield. For better or worse they felt at 1400$ the entire rifle should be new. Are we really arguing for used parts at 2K. 
At that price point I never want to replace that barrel with a match one. These rifles will never hold the value of the Norinco or Springfield until they are listed in the Blue book. Which both are. Please check the price of your absolutely perfectly built AK47 on a Nodak spud receiver. You should never stand for a used part on a 2,000$ rifle.  
How hard is it to have barrels turned to proper dimensions and then chrome lined even better than US GI. It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. See I just kept seeing US GI thrown around. Do they just sell the receivers. Like Mauser's I would totally prefer to build my own and avoid throwing half the rifle out. 
With a Springer that is a much cheaper way to go. Did you go read what was at the link? No but I will I have made rifle money pits and bought them too. I think the only point I was trying to make was that a Colt SP1 will always outsell a Nodak replicate no matter what. I would just say buy this one and plan to keep it. But If you ever needed to sell it for any reason. That's a tough sell. Your buyer should be up on metallurgy and construction of receivers to even consider paying more. But Joe blow will point down three tables and say . But I can buy a Springfield for 1400$. Even though you have the better rifle. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 4:59:51 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No but I will I have made rifle money pits and bought them too. I think the only point I was trying to make was that a Colt SP1 will always outsell a Nodak replicate no matter what. I would just say buy this one and plan to keep it. But If you ever needed to sell it for any reason. That's a tough sell. Your buyer should be up on metallurgy and construction of receivers to even consider paying more. But Joe blow will point down three tables and say . But I can buy a Springfield for 1400$. Even though you have the better rifle.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a Frankin M1A. Put together out of parts and assembled by anyone they can hire. The quality of the receiver and bolt may be top notch. Even the best. But that thing is never going to hold the value of a Springfield. For better or worse they felt at 1400$ the entire rifle should be new. Are we really arguing for used parts at 2K.
At that price point I never want to replace that barrel with a match one. These rifles will never hold the value of the Norinco or Springfield until they are listed in the Blue book. Which both are. Please check the price of your absolutely perfectly built AK47 on a Nodak spud receiver. You should never stand for a used part on a 2,000$ rifle.
How hard is it to have barrels turned to proper dimensions and then chrome lined even better than US GI. It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. See I just kept seeing US GI thrown around. Do they just sell the receivers. Like Mauser's I would totally prefer to build my own and avoid throwing half the rifle out.
With a Springer that is a much cheaper way to go. Did you go read what was at the link? No but I will I have made rifle money pits and bought them too. I think the only point I was trying to make was that a Colt SP1 will always outsell a Nodak replicate no matter what. I would just say buy this one and plan to keep it. But If you ever needed to sell it for any reason. That's a tough sell. Your buyer should be up on metallurgy and construction of receivers to even consider paying more. But Joe blow will point down three tables and say . But I can buy a Springfield for 1400$. Even though you have the better rifle.
The M14F is not a replica of an SAI M1A, it is a replica of an M14. An M1A is a replica of an M14. Nodak? You mean Novak? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 5:22:30 PM EDT
[#4]
I will skip the quote tree.
Nodak Great retro lowers AK receivers Uzi's too. Very well respected.met him at the big SAR show here in Phoenix a few years ago. Any rifle assembled with good parts on any of his receivers will be fantastic. But he has no big company status. So they often can be bought at a bargain price. That I find kind of sad. Great receiver aside. I will be looking for one second hand. Let the original buyer take the depreciation. At 2K that thing must shoot right out of the box. At 1400$ it can have a few tuning issues. 
600$ can fix a butt load of problems.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 5:38:24 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's a Frankin M1A. Put together out of parts and assembled by anyone they can hire. The quality of the receiver and bolt may be top notch. Even the best. But that thing is never going to hold the value of a Springfield. For better or worse they felt at 1400$ the entire rifle should be new. Are we really arguing for used parts at 2K.
At that price point I never want to replace that barrel with a match one. These rifles will never hold the value of the Norinco or Springfield until they are listed in the Blue book. Which both are. Please check the price of your absolutely perfectly built AK47 on a Nodak spud receiver. You should never stand for a used part on a 2,000$ rifle.
How hard is it to have barrels turned to proper dimensions and then chrome lined even better than US GI. It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. Criterion is what CMP uses on their "new" M1s |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 5:41:05 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Criterion is what CMP uses on their "new" M1s Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a Frankin M1A. Put together out of parts and assembled by anyone they can hire. The quality of the receiver and bolt may be top notch. Even the best. But that thing is never going to hold the value of a Springfield. For better or worse they felt at 1400$ the entire rifle should be new. Are we really arguing for used parts at 2K.
At that price point I never want to replace that barrel with a match one. These rifles will never hold the value of the Norinco or Springfield until they are listed in the Blue book. Which both are. Please check the price of your absolutely perfectly built AK47 on a Nodak spud receiver. You should never stand for a used part on a 2,000$ rifle.
How hard is it to have barrels turned to proper dimensions and then chrome lined even better than US GI. It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. Criterion is what CMP uses on their "new" M1s Yep, the "Special Grade", isn't it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 5:43:15 PM EDT
[#7]
Some of you guys are confused.
If this rifle has a 1. Forged and correctly heat treated receiver made of steel at least as good as G.I.spec machined to G.I. dimensions 2. A chrome-lined barrel made of steel as least as good as G.I. spec 3. The remainder of the parts are new or like new G.I parts then this rifle should be better that the cast receiver SA Inc M1A rifle in my view. If all of this is true it should hold it's value to those who know what they are looking at. Is it worth $2000 for an M14 clone? Not to me. But the SA Inc. clone was never worth it's asking price to me either. YMMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 5:49:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep, the "Special Grade", isn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a Frankin M1A. Put together out of parts and assembled by anyone they can hire. The quality of the receiver and bolt may be top notch. Even the best. But that thing is never going to hold the value of a Springfield. For better or worse they felt at 1400$ the entire rifle should be new. Are we really arguing for used parts at 2K.
At that price point I never want to replace that barrel with a match one. These rifles will never hold the value of the Norinco or Springfield until they are listed in the Blue book. Which both are. Please check the price of your absolutely perfectly built AK47 on a Nodak spud receiver. You should never stand for a used part on a 2,000$ rifle.
How hard is it to have barrels turned to proper dimensions and then chrome lined even better than US GI. It states that it is a NEW chrome lined Criterion barrel which are very good barrels. It's not an M1A. Criterion is what CMP uses on their "new" M1s Yep, the "Special Grade", isn't it? Yes, no historical value but nice shooters with new wood, new barrel and I believe, new metal on the wood. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 6:24:19 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryThey are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. . Quote HistoryI always though it was the designation for a semi-auto M14, like AR15 being the term for semi-auto M16/M4. It's become a generic term like kleenex and vaseline. 
They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. . Actually, "AR-15" is a registered trade mark of Colt. They bought the trademark and the rights to the design from Armalite back in 1959. They called the full-auto rifle the "AR-15" long before they had the civilian semi-auto version, and before the government formally adopted it as the M16 series. This is why nobody else uses the name "AR-15", and instead uses names such as "LAR-15", "M&P-15" and the like. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 7:17:55 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, "AR-15" is a registered trade mark of Colt. They bought the trademark and the rights to the design from Armalite back in 1959. They called the full-auto rifle the "AR-15" long before they had the civilian semi-auto version, and before the government formally adopted it as the M16 series. This is why nobody else uses the name "AR-15", and instead uses names such as "LAR-15", "M&P-15" and the like. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I always though it was the designation for a semi-auto M14, like AR15 being the term for semi-auto M16/M4. It's become a generic term like kleenex and vaseline.
They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. . Actually, "AR-15" is a registered trade mark of Colt. They bought the trademark and the rights to the design from Armalite back in 1959. They called the full-auto rifle the "AR-15" long before they had the civilian semi-auto version, and before the government formally adopted it as the M16 series. This is why nobody else uses the name "AR-15", and instead uses names such as "LAR-15", "M&P-15" and the like. And then, much later, long after the original Armalite went defunct and sold off their designs, tooling, etc. to Colt and others, Eagle Arms bought the rights to the company name, and now markets as ArmaLite. Which some folks will insist is the same as the original, even though the original Armalite AR-15s, design, tooling, patents, and name were all sold to Colt in the early 1960s. Kinda like how some folks think Springfield Armory Incorporated is the same as the Springfield (Government) Armory--a misconception assisted by SAI's logo and advertising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 7:36:31 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And then, much later, long after the original Armalite went defunct and sold off their designs, tooling, etc. to Colt and others, Eagle Arms bought the rights to the company name, and now markets as ArmaLite. Which some folks will insist is the same as the original, even though the original Armalite AR-15s, design, tooling, patents, and name were all sold to Colt in the early 1960s. Kinda like how some folks think Springfield Armory Incorporated is the same as the Springfield (Government) Armory--a misconception assisted by SAI's logo and advertising. lol wonder how long before this company begins to be confused with original Rockola stuff from when they manufactured guns for the military. I can hear the herp derp now by people at gun shows. "I've got this original military M14. It is a Rockola and was carried in Vietnam. You know, from the old jukebox company."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2013 8:09:47 PM EDT
[#12]
Find an LRB. Buy it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 12:16:31 AM EDT
[#13]
I am curious as to where they are getting the USGI parts for the build. It shows in the ad:
Please Note : Many of the Parts on these rifles are Original USGI and may show signs of service or storage wear , wood stock and exterior metal will be refinished. I thought it was a scarcity of USGI parts that lead Springfield Inc. to start using parts made overseas (Taiwan?)? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 12:30:02 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am curious as to where they are getting the USGI parts for the build. It shows in the ad: Please Note : Many of the Parts on these rifles are Original USGI and may show signs of service or storage wear , wood stock and exterior metal will be refinished. I thought it was a scarcity of USGI parts that lead Springfield Inc. to start using parts made overseas (Taiwan?)? Scarce means hard to obtain, not "does not exist." If Elmer Fudd bought all the USGI M14 parts and stored them in his wabbit hole because he thought no one needs a semi auto, then the parts are scarce. If Ms. Fudd sells all the parts after Elmer croaked, parts are no longer scarce. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 6:16:50 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Scarce means hard to obtain, not "does not exist." If Elmer Fudd bought all the USGI M14 parts and stored them in his wabbit hole because he thought no one needs a semi auto, then the parts are scarce. If Ms. Fudd sells all the parts after Elmer croaked, parts are no longer scarce. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I am curious as to where they are getting the USGI parts for the build. It shows in the ad: Please Note : Many of the Parts on these rifles are Original USGI and may show signs of service or storage wear , wood stock and exterior metal will be refinished. I thought it was a scarcity of USGI parts that lead Springfield Inc. to start using parts made overseas (Taiwan?)? Scarce means hard to obtain, not "does not exist." If Elmer Fudd bought all the USGI M14 parts and stored them in his wabbit hole because he thought no one needs a semi auto, then the parts are scarce. If Ms. Fudd sells all the parts after Elmer croaked, parts are no longer scarce. Pretty much. I think cost of parts has a lot to do with it too. If Springfield still used USGI, you would not find them at the price point you do now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 6:51:12 AM EDT
[#16]
Nifty revival of the RockOla name.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 7:27:15 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are those who use it as a generic term. They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. People should call things what they are marked as. I sure as hell don't want my M14S referred to as an M1A. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought I read that "M1A" is a Springfield Armory branding of their semi-auto M14. Just like M14F is the model branding for James River. Hpoefully Different will be along to correct me if I'm wrong. Yes. M1A is trademarked to Springfield Armory Inc.. Yes sir, but there are those who call all M14 clones "M1A" and get all huffy when you point out this very thing. I always though it was the designation for a semi-auto M14, like AR15 being the term for semi-auto M16/M4. It's become a generic term like kleenex and vaseline.
There are those who use it as a generic term. They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. People should call things what they are marked as. I sure as hell don't want my M14S referred to as an M1A. Colt semi autos were SP-1 stamped in the old days . Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 7:50:33 AM EDT
[#18]
The amount of confusion in this thread is making my fucking head hurt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 8:47:59 AM EDT
[#19]
I wish I had the money!
Anyone know if they are going to sell just the receivers in the near future? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2013 10:32:10 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wish I had the money! Anyone know if they are going to sell just the receivers in the near future? It looks like they are for sale now James River Armory |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2013 12:27:38 PM EDT
[#21]
$800 for the stripped receiver?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2013 1:39:58 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And then, much later, long after the original Armalite went defunct and sold off their designs, tooling, etc. to Colt and others, Eagle Arms bought the rights to the company name, and now markets as ArmaLite. Which some folks will insist is the same as the original, even though the original Armalite AR-15s, design, tooling, patents, and name were all sold to Colt in the early 1960s. Kinda like how some folks think Springfield Armory Incorporated is the same as the Springfield (Government) Armory--a misconception assisted by SAI's logo and advertising. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I always though it was the designation for a semi-auto M14, like AR15 being the term for semi-auto M16/M4. It's become a generic term like kleenex and vaseline.
They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. . Actually, "AR-15" is a registered trade mark of Colt. They bought the trademark and the rights to the design from Armalite back in 1959. They called the full-auto rifle the "AR-15" long before they had the civilian semi-auto version, and before the government formally adopted it as the M16 series. This is why nobody else uses the name "AR-15", and instead uses names such as "LAR-15", "M&P-15" and the like. And then, much later, long after the original Armalite went defunct and sold off their designs, tooling, etc. to Colt and others, Eagle Arms bought the rights to the company name, and now markets as ArmaLite. Which some folks will insist is the same as the original, even though the original Armalite AR-15s, design, tooling, patents, and name were all sold to Colt in the early 1960s. Kinda like how some folks think Springfield Armory Incorporated is the same as the Springfield (Government) Armory--a misconception assisted by SAI's logo and advertising. Find one person on this board who insists that ArmaLite is the original company. One person. Show me one person who thinks that the M-15 from ArmaLite should be called "AR-15". The current ArmaLite has made a hell of a lot more guns, including the AR-10, than the original but no one that I have seen needs the history lesson nor thinks that the current ArmaLite is the original. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2013 1:42:06 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Colt semi autos were SP-1 stamped in the old days . Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes. M1A is trademarked to Springfield Armory Inc.. Yes sir, but there are those who call all M14 clones "M1A" and get all huffy when you point out this very thing. I always though it was the designation for a semi-auto M14, like AR15 being the term for semi-auto M16/M4. It's become a generic term like kleenex and vaseline.
There are those who use it as a generic term. They are wrong just like calling all AR-15 clones "AR-15" is wrong. Also, the AR-15 was full auto before the military adopted it as the M-16 so the name "AR-15" does not mean a semiauto M16. Later, Colt started producing semiauto AR-15s and stamped them as such. People should call things what they are marked as. I sure as hell don't want my M14S referred to as an M1A. Colt semi autos were SP-1 stamped in the old days . Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Didn't they, or some Colts, also carry the "AR-15" logo? They do still own the name, IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2013 1:58:12 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$800 for the stripped receiver? lol...Yeah, so much for that idea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2013 7:08:31 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol...Yeah, so much for that idea. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
$800 for the stripped receiver? lol...Yeah, so much for that idea. IIRC LRB is about the same price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2013 3:16:34 PM EDT
[#26]
Sounds as though I haven't done my homework from my reading here. I have an SA Squad Scout on order at my LGS. I have plenty of time to cancel my order but I would still prefer an 18 " barrel over a 22".
Who else can supply that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2013 9:20:42 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds as though I haven't done my homework from my reading here. I have an SA Squad Scout on order at my LGS. I have plenty of time to cancel my order but I would still prefer an 18 " barrel over a 22". Who else can supply that? One of my dad's friends he used to work with (leo) shoots quite a bit. He owned one and never could get it to group well. I've heard mixed reviews on them as well. They will definitely shoot better in full size. Personally I've only had experience with the full length versions. But YMMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:06:04 PM EDT
[#28]
Little update.
I gave James River Armory a call and spoke to the gentleman who puts these rifles together. He was very kind and answered all my questions with no BS. They are still pretty new to this so not a lot of information is available but there will be some stuff coming out in American Rifleman magazine and Shotgun news soon as well as some stuff in time for Shot show. Apart from the barrel and bolt they are using all GI parts (The barrel is Criterion, The bolts I was told were new as it was hard to find surplus GI bolts now) They are in it to get peoples attention about these rifles. I told him from the start this was to honor my dad and he and I were on the same page from the start of the conversation.
From the info they gave me I am definitely leaning toward one of these over a Springfield. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:17:59 PM EDT
[#29]
Am I the only person that is pissed at that company for making Rock-ola m1 carbine receivers that don't seem to have a part that indicates they are a repo?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:27:10 PM EDT
[#30]
If you wait, and search hard, you may even find an MKS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:30:26 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Am I the only person that is pissed at that company for making Rock-ola m1 carbine receivers that don't seem to have a part that indicates they are a repo? Serial number range is different and they are marked different. If you confuse a James River with an original, you need to hit the books. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:43:29 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you wait, and search hard, you may even find an MKS. (throws laptop through window, face turns purple, veins pop, head explodes) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 12:59:01 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Am I the only person that is pissed at that company for making Rock-ola m1 carbine receivers that don't seem to have a part that indicates they are a repo? ETA: Disregard: it appears the same company is indeed making M1 carbine repos. OP is asking about the M14 though |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2013 3:49:36 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
