[ARCHIVED THREAD] - ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 6/16/2014 12:30:18 AM EDT
| ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, |
|
The only reason to buy it is because it's got a wood stock, and it was at one time US issue...for a very, very short time.
The FAL is better in pretty much every way, save the sights (because of the way the rear sight is mounted). The SCAR is better in every single way. I had an M1A, sold it. I have 6 or so FAL variants, and a SCAR, and have no plans on selling any of them. |
|
Not a M-14, not made by the real Springfield Armory, probably not a single USGI part on a new one. Not the best ergonomics. Safety is in a bad spot. Parts are expensive. PIA to mount a scope on.
That being said, I own 2 SA Inc rifles and a LRB. I have shot the M1A type rifle for over 20 years. If I lived in a state where I could, I would buy the LMT 308. YMMV |
|
I have the scout version. My wife has the Match. Both are Springfields. It shoots great and is reliable.
I would choose it over any other battle rifle for the following reasons. Reliable, accurate, American, power, ease of carry and storage, and well made. If you don't plan on adding extras (like one would with an AR15), it is finer just the way it is. I put a scout scope on mine. I may add a flashlight mount. I also own 2 FALs. I have been considering selling those. Great rifles, but I prefer the M1A. |
|
Quoted:
The only reason to buy it is because it's got a wood stock, and it was at one time US issue...for a very, very short time. The FAL is better in pretty much every way, save the sights (because of the way the rear sight is mounted). The SCAR is better in every single way. I had an M1A, sold it. I have 6 or so FAL variants, and a SCAR, and have no plans on selling any of them. I own both an FAL and two M14 clones (SA and LRB). I have a hard time finding whats "better" about the FAL, and as a matter of fact from a handling and ergonomics standpoint I would take the M14 clone over the FAL on any given day. |
| I enjoy these discussions and like to compare them with M1 discussions. Very few negative comments on the M1 but a fair amount of hate for the M1a/M14 especially about ergonomics. I carried an M14 in the Army. Worked great, great sights and the ergonomics were excellent. mIm secretly saving my pennies for an LRB. |
| I own a couple including a pro built match rifle . The newer scope mounts help with that issue . The ergonomics are pretty good . They are not cheap. spares and magazines are expensive . That said you never need any spares . I have replaced 1 recoil spring over the years and it is on a gun I use as a suppressor host . |
I'm fully convinced an M1A/M14 will do everything an AR-10 will do....and do it in style at the same time. 
Mine is an all-USGI 094,xxx and easily shot sub-MOA groups in the EBR chassis using 147gr ball. It was definitely more accurate than I was. The rifles are dead nuts reliable, scary accurate if you know what you're doing, there's big aftermarket for them with easy-to-find parts, they don't beat up optics like the SCAR and FAL are notorious for doing, they have the best irons of any platform, mags are pretty cheap ($20-25 shipped) and easy to find, they don't chew up brass (*cough* HK *cough*), and a quality set up will cost less or on par with a similar set up from another rifle. 
|
|
This is my second one, tried to scope the first and did not do well at all. Traded it for a DPMS LR 308 and it is scary accurate. Easily the most accurate rifle I've ever owned. Got the M1A itch again so got another one. No intentions to scope it.
Shoots great Thank goodness I reload .308 - |
|
I've always liked them. From the days when they were the big boy high power match rifle.
I also like the FAL in the inch style. For some reason I don't like the metric grip angle. They're a good and robust rifle. between the two -magazines are a wash, they're now about the same price, they both hold 20 in standard size, insert the same, work the same. -m14 front end is a bit stiffer when slung up -FAL sights are much more coarse in adjusting, windage is a set it and leave it affair, and so is the rear for that matter. It's a good combat sight and less of a range master sight. -m14 trigger beats the FAL every day and twice on sunday. Inch triggers are better than metrics but they both suck compared to a m14 trigger. -both are durable I don't own an AR type .308 but I'll put my thoughts out and am open to being corrected; -very good sights and a much better ability for scoping unlike the two 1950's battle rifles -very good trigger options -straight insert magazines is easier than the rock to lock types (not that they can't be mastered) -accuracy is well regarded and it stays that way unlike the bedding in a M14 match type (not counting the rigid modern chassis) -the downside is the compatibility issue; too many versions of .308 AR's out there, hopefully the one you get doesn't go obsolete early and gets long life support -aluminum; lighter but how much wear will it take??? I don't know either. Will it live through 4 or 5 barrels like an M1a? -very good ergonomics and as designed not like the m14 chassis which are a work around on an existing platform. (not that they aren't clever designs) ETA- the AR types seem to have a lot more problems for some with getting them to cycle reliably. Especially home builds. |
|
Quoted:
Nostalgia. That's it. Quoted:
Quoted:
It seems there is a solid amount of people who like the M1A here within the hive, but what does it have over the SCAR, AR-10 and FAL rifles if anything? Why purchase it over the others? Nostalgia. That's it. Agreed - good range toy. Cool points on the range too. |
|
As a teen, I started shooting service rifle comps in the mid-80's with an M1 (Garand) that my grandfather gave me. A few years later, I "upgraded" to an accurized Polytech M14 and loved that rifle. At the time, most of the top shooters were moving on to the AR15 variants, but I still shot the M14 until the late 90's. Didn't win very often, but I had a lot of fun with that rifle. I still shoot it once in a while and prefer the ergos to my FAL.
That being said, aesthetics and nostalgia are just about the only things the M1A/M14 have over more modern .308 semi-autos, IMO. For iron sights, it's still hard to beat a good set of NM sights on an M1/M14, though. |
|
Quoted:
What kind of M80 ball are you guys sing that is mechanically sub MOA capable? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Mine is an all-USG 094,xxx I and easily shot sub-MOA groups in the EBR chassis using 147gr ball All day long. What kind of M80 ball are you guys sing that is mechanically sub MOA capable? The kind that is sub MOA if he does his part. |
|
Quoted:
The kind that is sub MOA if he does his part. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Mine is an all-USG 094,xxx I and easily shot sub-MOA groups in the EBR chassis using 147gr ball All day long. What kind of M80 ball are you guys sing that is mechanically sub MOA capable? The kind that is sub MOA if he does his part. This oughta be good.
|
|
Find someone who has one that will let you shoot theirs.
The M1A is a very pleasing to shoot rifle. It is a great shooter with irons. Optics are not readily mounted to a standard rifle as with an AR style rifle with rails, although there are a few offerings of good mounts, although they are decently expensive. Good mags are not expensive currently. They generally aren't picky about what type of ball ammo you are using. The standard rifles have 22 inch barrels, but the Scout and Bush have 18 inch, while the SOCOM has a 16 inch IIRC. My favorite is the Scout with the forward scout rail. A standard M1A with a Walnut stock is probably one of the most beautiful guns ever made. |
I like them! Had a govt. hand me down H&R M14 for work up until a couple of years ago, when my dept. turned them back in to get ARs. 
I have a personally owned Springfield scout and a Norinco clone. Both shoot good and I love the .308 goodness. Only flaws IMO are weight and they just don't look right with scope jacked up way high in the sky on them. Iron sights only for me on mine. |
|
Quoted:
You better tell all the guys from "the greatest generation" about that safety. They apparently did not realize it when it was employed on the M1. Quoted:
Quoted:
The safety placement is a unintended discharge waiting to happen. You better tell all the guys from "the greatest generation" about that safety. They apparently did not realize it when it was employed on the M1. Oh boy, here we go. If the greatest generation used it, it's PERFECT and never malfunctioned nor has design flaws. |
|
Quoted:
I'm fully convinced an M1A/M14 will do everything an AR-10 will do....and do it in style at the same time.
Mine is an all-USGI 094,xxx and easily shot sub-MOA groups in the EBR chassis using 147gr ball. It was definitely more accurate than I was. The rifles are dead nuts reliable, scary accurate if you know what you're doing, there's big aftermarket for them with easy-to-find parts, they don't beat up optics like the SCAR and FAL are notorious for doing, they have the best irons of any platform, mags are pretty cheap ($20-25 shipped) and easy to find, they don't chew up brass (*cough* HK *cough*), and a quality set up will cost less or on par with a similar set up from another rifle. http://i1346.photobucket.com/albums/p691/nigelcornwallis/20130823_163802_zpsllito12y.jpg http://i1346.photobucket.com/albums/p691/nigelcornwallis/20130824_112916-1_zps57z0dlp9.jpg http://i1346.photobucket.com/albums/p691/nigelcornwallis/20130925_154359-1_zpsd99aa151.jpg http://i1346.photobucket.com/albums/p691/nigelcornwallis/20140607_181625-1_zpslim4hry3.jpg http://i1346.photobucket.com/albums/p691/nigelcornwallis/20140607_181642-1_zpsialoekx7.jpg This. They are works of engineering art, and shoot like dreams. I can't wait to get a Scout.... 
|
|
Quoted:
Would I rather have a SCAR17. Yes if the price was $1600 or less. FAL is a boat anchor. http://i542.photobucket.com/albums/gg428/mcwherterj_photos/imagejpg1_zps04bf7f9a.jpg[/URL] Yeah, the FAL has a poor record in combat compared to the SOCOM 16. |
|
Quoted:
Oh boy, here we go. If the greatest generation used it, it's PERFECT and never malfunctioned nor has design flaws. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The safety placement is a unintended discharge waiting to happen. You better tell all the guys from "the greatest generation" about that safety. They apparently did not realize it when it was employed on the M1. Oh boy, here we go. If the greatest generation used it, it's PERFECT and never malfunctioned nor has design flaws. I couldn't begin to remember how many cases of ammo I've put through M1 and M1a rifles over the years. Never had an issue with the safety or operation thereof. If that safety causes you to have an ND, you are either retarded or have tourettes and probably shouldn't be handling firearms in the first place. |
|
Quoted:
Yeah, the FAL has a poor record in combat compared to the SOCOM 16. Quoted:
Quoted:
Would I rather have a SCAR17. Yes if the price was $1600 or less. FAL is a boat anchor. http://i542.photobucket.com/albums/gg428/mcwherterj_photos/imagejpg1_zps04bf7f9a.jpg[/URL] Yeah, the FAL has a poor record in combat compared to the SOCOM 16. I never said that, they are just plain heavy.. M14 is still in use. Was the socom 16 used in the military? But yeah the action is the same I guess so technically you are right. |
|
Quoted:
I couldn't begin to remember how many cases of ammo I've put through M1 and M1a rifles over the years. Never had an issue with the safety or operation thereof. If that safety causes you to have an ND, you are either retarded or have tourettes and probably shouldn't be handling firearms in the first place. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The safety placement is a unintended discharge waiting to happen. You better tell all the guys from "the greatest generation" about that safety. They apparently did not realize it when it was employed on the M1. Oh boy, here we go. If the greatest generation used it, it's PERFECT and never malfunctioned nor has design flaws. I couldn't begin to remember how many cases of ammo I've put through M1 and M1a rifles over the years. Never had an issue with the safety or operation thereof. If that safety causes you to have an ND, you are either retarded or have tourettes and probably shouldn't be handling firearms in the first place. OK, I know the answer ahead of time. But do you honestly think the placement of the safety there is a good idea for en masse issue? I mean, I've reholstered AIWB thousands of times safely. That doesn't mean I don't think it's not a good idea to use a weapon that allows you to ride the hammer as you reholster. |
|
Quoted:
I never said that they are just plain heavy.. M14 is still in use. Was the socom 16 used in the military? But yeah the action is the same I guess so technically you are right. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would I rather have a SCAR17. Yes if the price was $1600 or less. FAL is a boat anchor. http://i542.photobucket.com/albums/gg428/mcwherterj_photos/imagejpg1_zps04bf7f9a.jpg[/URL] Yeah, the FAL has a poor record in combat compared to the SOCOM 16. I never said that they are just plain heavy.. M14 is still in use. Was the socom 16 used in the military? But yeah the action is the same I guess so technically you are right. The SOCOMs have had problems and have a slightly different gas system. |
|
Quoted:
The kind that is sub MOA if he does his part. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Mine is an all-USG 094,xxx I and easily shot sub-MOA groups in the EBR chassis using 147gr ball All day long. What kind of M80 ball are you guys sing that is mechanically sub MOA capable? The kind that is sub MOA if he does his part. Ok. What is sub MOA? Could you please let me know which M80 ball I can get that yields sub MOA groups? |
|
Quoted:
The only reason to buy it is because it's got a wood stock, and it was at one time US issue...for a very, very short time. The FAL is better in pretty much every way, save the sights (because of the way the rear sight is mounted). The SCAR is better in every single way. I had an M1A, sold it. I have 6 or so FAL variants, and a SCAR, and have no plans on selling any of them. Had an FAL, sold it. Have an M1a, and always will. The FAL is a great rifle, but that doesn't mean the M14/M1a sucks. Point/counterpoint. edit: lol @ your comment "except the sights" You know, the very thing you use to aim the gun... Kinda important, no? |
|
Quoted:
The SOCOMs have had problems and have a slightly different gas system. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would I rather have a SCAR17. Yes if the price was $1600 or less. FAL is a boat anchor. http://i542.photobucket.com/albums/gg428/mcwherterj_photos/imagejpg1_zps04bf7f9a.jpg[/URL] Yeah, the FAL has a poor record in combat compared to the SOCOM 16. I never said that they are just plain heavy.. M14 is still in use. Was the socom 16 used in the military? But yeah the action is the same I guess so technically you are right. The SOCOMs have had problems and have a slightly different gas system. How is the gas system different and what problems do the socom 16 have? I researched before I bought and looks like the socom can take GI parts and are very reliable. |
|
Because you can butt stroke the heck out of some dirtbag with that steel plate on that wooden stock that's why.
Then while he's stunned you give him a few more in the face with the butt plate until movement stops or another dirtbag's atteniton is required. Sorry, I was having a bayonet training flash back. Are there gooks in the wire? Old Marine 
|