Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 8/20/2003 11:10:34 AM EST
... because I'm thinking of getting one. Standard with black polymer stock.
Link Posted: 8/20/2003 11:35:49 AM EST
While I don't know if they're Q.C. issues or not,They have been subsituting cast parts in place of USGI parts as they run out of them, this includes Bolts,and possibly op-rods,and other small parts, Some people don't mind, others replace them with USGI parts from other sources,As the USGI parts were forged, and in my opinion only, better than cast....
Link Posted: 8/20/2003 4:44:14 PM EST
How are they better than cast? Last longer? Less prone to breakage?
Link Posted: 8/20/2003 6:25:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2003 6:56:17 PM EST by Ralph]
Most forged parts start as lumps of steel that are beaten into a rough shape of the part being made, and then machined into that part, and heat treated to whatever degree of hardness that is needed, Investment casting as is being done today produces a part that dosen't need nearly as much machining, and is cheaper to produce,(The key word here is cheaper) I assume they, are also heat treated, Forged parts in my opinion will wear longer than the cast parts,Look at the receivers on the Garands the CMP is selling, these are forged machined parts,(as are alot of parts on a M1)I'm pretty sure, if memory serves me right, they took over 100 machining operations for each receiver, most are 50 years old or older, they are still going strong, not even close to wearing out...look at the receivers that S.A. is putting on their "New Garands" a investment casting, made in Austriala, and they've had(and still are) some problems with them,(out of spec.) How long will they last? I don't know,But on a M1, I'll take forged parts, thank you, Look at it this way, if the gov't thought cast parts would stand up to the abuse the m1/m-14 was going to get from long term everyday use, they would of used them, but they insisted on forged parts, because they will (again in my opinion) last much longer... The receivers that S.A. uses on the M-14 are also cast, here in the U.S, and from what I've read here and elsewhere they don't have too many problems with them, my guess would be tighter Q.C. than their friends in Austrialia have...The part that scares me is they are using cast bolts, That's a part that has to be right, and There's one place I would insist on a forged part, I don't know if they do, but the cast bolts should be magnafluxed before sent off for assembly...
Link Posted: 8/20/2003 7:04:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/20/2003 7:12:13 PM EST by slt223]
I have an older M1A NM (SN 041xxx), and the fit and finish is aesthetically pleasing to say the least. I currently work part time in a gunstore and can tell you first hand that every new M1A that has come through the door has been an absolute pig compared to the older M1A's. Spend an extra $200 and get a pre-ban. Not for the bayo-lug, for the USGI parts set and quality of finishing work. I wish I had a digital camera to show you some close ups of mine so you could compare a pre-ban to the junk they're producing today. I'm sure they shoot fine, for the most part. I believe they worked out the trigger pin and extractor problem. Both of which evolved from SA manufacturing their own parts as USGI surplus is running out. But with a $1700+ MSRP of the M1A Loaded I would expect an accurate, reliable, and WELL finished rifle. FWIW, I'm still seeing prebans go $1500 in excellent condition. Vollmer had a preban SA M1A Standard with walnut hand guard for $1095 just a couple weeks ago.

Here's what I'm talking about. Pay close attention to finish. Take a good look at the rear sight components, and compare them to what you see in you local gun store. The sight drums on the new guns were clearly coarse cut on a lathe, but never fine cut.

Link Posted: 8/21/2003 4:02:31 PM EST
Without question, the debate rages on. Most certainly a forged part is, ultimately superior...however, a properly machined and heat-treated casting is, today, far superior to those "castings of old." Technology has moved forward a bit. A properly machined and treated casting will outlive you! I shoot an Armscorp NM M14 and, IMHO it is miles better than the "Sproingfield." Easily one MOA if I do my part. Yes, SA has a good guarantee....and they usually seem to need it. I see stories daily of shooters having to send em' back for improperly indexed barrels, out of whack sights, operating problems...and the list goes on. Want a cheap forged receiver? Buy a Chicom Polytech and replace all the other parts with USGI. For about $800 bucks, you have something as close to an original M14 as can be had short of taking on a 2nd mortgage! If you want to go deeper into this controversy, I suggest you cruise over to www.battlerifles.com
and peruse the M14/M1A board. Lots of highly knowledgeable shooters there.
Link Posted: 8/21/2003 5:28:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/21/2003 5:39:11 PM EST by slt223]
Here's nice preban SA NM for sale.


And another...this one allegedly has never been fired.


And another

Link Posted: 8/22/2003 4:26:04 PM EST
Hmmm... general consensus seems to be don't get one of the newer ones. Well, I wasn't sure about dropping $1K+ on a battle rifle when I could get another FAL anyway. Thanks for the help, guys.
Link Posted: 8/24/2003 3:10:30 AM EST
Maybe I just got lucky, but I have had no problems whatsoever with my M1a.

Just to be on the safe side, I have replaced the bolt, op rod, and trigger group with GI parts. I was fortunate enough to be able to buy these cheap. (Relatively speaking)

Shoots better than I can hold, and has been 100% reliable so far. (Knock on wood!)

I just need to do something about that stock! Black looks good when new, but the paint chips off easily. Oh well, that is a project for another time.
Top Top