So, I loved my Springfield SOCOM 16, but last year, I had experienced a finical upheaval in which it was necessary to sell it off. I am again working and with a stable job, I’m thinking of getting another. But alas, it is only offered with a cast receiver, should this be over looked?

I’ve seen other companies who sell forge receivers, but don’t offer the 16in barrel.

How difficult would it be replace the barrel, sights and gas system? Sounds like a big pain in the ass.. Or should I just stick with the Springfield and go through life wondering what a forge receiver would be like?

I bought my M1a about the turn of the century.  Now it hasn't seen a lot of hard use, but it has seen a few rounds, because surplus was cheap back then.

I replaced some of the parts with GI parts, because it seemed the cool thing to do.  Once again, it wasn't that expensive back then, (though measured in today's IPAs, it was higher.

I am 58, and I don't worry about how long that cast receiver will last.  I suspect it will outlast more than 1 barrel, and will probably still be giving good service when a young James T. Kirk enters Starfleet Academy.

Being a middle aged bachelor, my boomsticks seem to last longer than those who are issued to people 1/3 my age.  I don't worry about the cast vs forged controversy, as I will not be around to see the first failure, speaking in statistical terms.

Cast has come a long way.

Cast is filthy crime against Motherland.  Proper rifle forged.  Forged not cast.  Good comrades of Norinco making proper receiver forging.  Other capitalist companies too.  But not cheap of cost.  Best for you buying forged receiver then building proper rifle.

I have some SAInc M1A Rifles from the 1970-1980's periods. All have cast receivers and between them, have shot 5,000-7,000 rounds per year for 20 years. Many barrels have been shot out; however, no problems with the receivers (not even wearing out the serrations on the elevation side).
Forged or cast, either will outlast you.

Edit: Don't listen to Fluffy the Cat. Fluffy is a pussy.

LOL!!!..

Did you have any problems other then shooting out the barrels?
Was it necessary to replace anything on the rifles?

Over the years, I have broken off the right bolt lug of a Winchester bolt, broken about three extractors (all USGI), broken an ejector spring (only found out when I disassembled the bolt. It worked fine in two pieces), pulled the threaded sleeve off an old USGI NM windage knob (way back, they machined off the regular threads and pressed on a finer threaded sleeve), broke off hammer hooks about twice (all USGI), and replaced parts for normal wear (op rod springs, magazines, etc). Being an Army shooter, I used all USGI parts on my SAInc M1A Rifles. It was far simpler to use a personally owned rifle rather than going through the maze of signing out a gov't rifle each time. I never had a problem with SAInc cast receivers.

Thanks for the info, I'm still wondering if I should try to piece one together with USGI components and a forge receiver or just get the M1A SOCOM and just replace everything but the receiver (and barrel of course). I think in the long run, the SAInc. receivers will be fine, its just that I also plan on using a suppressor and I think that will put a lot more stress on it...maybe I'm wrong.

The biggest issues with the SA cast receives is not their strength, but their lack of quality control.  Newer SA M1As are known very several issues. There are often issues with the receiver being out of spec in the scope mounting area, making scope mounting difficult if not impossible.  New guns often run into issues with cases sticking in the chamber, requiring a trip back to SA. That was the issue my M1A had.   Some guns have the dreaded bolt roller impact.  Which is where the roller impacts the receiver due to improperly machined receiver, and over time it causes the roller to fail.
Of course, with SA's life time warranty, which some people tout as a selling point, they will take care of it.  But I feel that if I pay $1500 plus for a rifle, it shouldn't come with those problems.

Chinese made Polys and Norincos have receivers that are good to go, and are generally much cheaper than M1As.  They do have some issues too, but those are generally easily fixed smaller things.  The biggest issue with them is the bolt.  But if you plan on changing out the barrel, you could do the bolt at the same time.  I had one SA M1A, but due to its issue, I sold it and now have 3 Polytechs that I have upgrade.

Hey Chuck, with the problem you had with the op rod, would you say the same thing about the other components on the rifle, that is, should they be replaced with USGI components?

I experienced multiple problems with my M1A, but the cast receiver was not a problem.

That said, all of my M14s are built on forged Poly Tech receivers.

Dimensional geometry and proper heat treatment is what concerns me on a M14 type receiver.  Forged and cast are both strong enough.

at best a forging is 10 to 13% stronger. Not enough for me pay the extra.

I had a GI bolt fit to my polytech rifle and barrel by warbird way back love it.

I think you already got your answer. but I'll toss in one more comment.  There is a commercial company that has been making cast receivers for several decades without strength related issues.  However, to reiterate Different's point, that same company has sufficiently illustrated what happens when proper geometries are not observed.  The M14 type receiver has more than its share of subtle geometry issues including the firing pin bridge, which is a safety related feature.

Cast is not the problem as much as sloppy manufacturing and QA.

As others have stated, cast receivers, when made with proper QC, are just fine.

I find it amazing at the number of persons who talk smack about SA's cast receivers.  I chalk most of it up to ignorance and lack of historical knowledge.

Back before the black rifle took the lead in High Power competition, there were literally THOUSANDS of SA M1A's being used by competitors, firing probably MILLIONS of rounds of ammo through them.  Nobody among the High Power rifle competitors was running around saying cast receivers suck.  

That alone should be an endorsement that a cast receiver is not automatically a death knell for rifle durability.

I have a SA receiver that would not headspace with any combination of gi bolt or bbl. Had to have a short chambered barrel installed then reamed. Its all about what you want to do. If you are trying to build an all gi gun the best way is with an lrb receiver.

As long as cast components are properly heat treated they will be just as good...no worries running cast if the QC is there.

It's my understanding that SA, Inc. has reinforced certain parts of their receivers with added material.  I've read where they are 100% machined.

I don't own any M14-type rifles with cast receivers, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy an older SA, Inc.  if I could find one marked with "7.62 mm" and was built with USGI parts.

In fact, I want one *just because*.

While I don't have thousands of rounds from my M1A, aren't the Ruger M77 receivers cast?  And they come in the big louden-boomer chamberings.