Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 5/15/2003 7:22:23 AM EDT
So, I have a freind that knows a dealer, that has a brand new, never been fired springfield m1a (synthetic) standard. He would sell it to me for about two hundred bucks off of normal marketing price to me, if I want it. I remember hearing that some of you disapproved of the m1a, while, others liked it alot. With the AWB ban being reconsidered with the m1a on it, I see this as a plus to getting one now. What do you guys think? What are some real pro's and cons to this rifle? -theseacow [beer][sex][sleep]
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 7:30:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 7:34:33 AM EDT
There are two problems with the M1A as currently produced by SA Inc. 1. Cast parts. Most are probably fine, but some have shown some durability problems and fit has been problematic for some. But again, the vast majority will be fine. 2. Magazines are expensive about 35.00 from Cole's distributing. 80.00 or more from Springfield, and anywhere between from other sources. Otherwise the M1A is a great rifle. Properly set up and maintained it is reliable, accurate and powerful. The standard M1A is also very user maintainable. GI parts are available if a part fails and they are easy to replace.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 7:46:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By icemanat95: There are two problems with the M1A as currently produced by SA Inc. 1. Cast parts. Most are probably fine, but some have shown some durability problems and fit has been problematic for some. But again, the vast majority will be fine.
View Quote
Yeah. They will likely only last 2 or 3 lifetimes.
2. Magazines are expensive about 35.00 from Cole's distributing. 80.00 or more from Springfield, and anywhere between from other sources.
View Quote
Sadly all too true.
Otherwise the M1A is a great rifle. Properly set up and maintained it is reliable, accurate and powerful. The standard M1A is also very user maintainable. GI parts are available if a part fails and they are easy to replace.
View Quote
Other than expensive Mags I don't think there is a damn thing wrong with an SA M1A. I love mine but still for most puposes prefer the AR. For me the ergonomics of the AR are near perfection.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 8:02:31 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 8:22:17 AM EDT
Well, opinions vary. If you want a battle rifle (i.e. 308 caliber magazine fed) that will use ONLY iron sights the M1A is a good one. It should eat any surplus ammo and shoot to about 2-3 MOA without too much trouble. If you want to add a red dot scope or magnification scope, do NOT pick the M1A. The FAL is a better choice for this. If you want reall accuracy out of a 308 mag fed semiauto get either an AR10 or a SR25. Opinions are worth what ya paid for em.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 9:36:27 AM EDT
Hey seacow.. I have the Standard version and love it.. Yup, mags are expensive.. I believe it shoots better than 2MOA and certainly better than I can put to use. The more powerful round is awesome. The sound of the bullet hitting the dirt mound at 200 yards is impressive. A good site to visit: battlerifles.com.. It's a site like this one - good folks - who love their rifles - lots of info and help. later buy it!!!!!
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 10:06:38 AM EDT
Several years ago, a gun mag did a torture test on the SA M1A. They put something like 10,000 rounds through it without stopping to see when it would fail. They had teams of people loading mags and pulling the trigger. Several times the barrel got so hot that it set the stock on fire. To put it out, they just dunked the rifle in a bucket of water, shook off the excess, and continued firing. It never did suffer a major failure and, at the end, fired a group that was tighter than the group they fired at the beginning. There may be a better SHTF rifle, but not by much. As a deer rifle, it is heavy, but workable. Mounting a scope is a little problematic, but also workable. Mags may be a little expensive, but that's a one-time cost, and you can probably get cheaper ones at a gun show. As far as a making something go bang, it is about as fun as any weapon you are likely to find. You don't have one yet?
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 10:09:01 AM EDT
I should add that the synthetic stock will probably stink for a while so you should probably leave it out somewhere where it can air out. Also, the surface on the stock isn't as durable as it could be so you may want to touch it up after you have used it a while or even get another stock. But, overall, those are minor issues with a great rifle.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 10:43:56 AM EDT
DO IT! I have had an SA M1A for about a year now, it's cool, and by cool, I mean totally sweet. Seriously though, I took a few YEARS to decide what rifle I wanted - because I only wanted one... I have never regreted it for a second. It is the best. Mags are mildly expensive: $35 for QUALITY mags Ammo can be had for $150 for the GOOD STUFF. It is not the best platform for optics, as they tend to be a bit high, but who needs them? The iron sights ROCK! It is accurate as F^ck! It will never jam. Don't listen to that cast parts B.S. it is extremely overblown. A real non-issue. Buy it and never look back.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 7:20:49 PM EDT
It is not the best platform for optics, as they tend to be a bit high, but who needs them?
View Quote
There are a number of options for the scope mount. Some are high enough that you can use the iron sights at the same time. Naturally, that puts the scope a little higher than it would be on a typical bolt-action deer rifle. Others will mount the scope lower, but then you can't use the iron sights without taking the scope off. Whichever mount you choose, get one that is anchored to the receiver pretty well. There are some that have only one mounting screw that goes in that screw hole on the left side of the receiver. The mount is adjusted with two set screws that ride on the left edge of the receiver. I wouldn't recommend that kind of mount unless you are planning on leaving the scope permanently mounted. If you remove the scope, you will have to go through a fair amount of fiddling to get it zeroed in again. It is better to get one that is securely anchored to the receiver in at least two points -- and the extra expense is worth it, too. But, you will probably be very happy with it. It is a Garand that accepts magazines, so it comes from a good family line.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 7:49:16 PM EDT
I own 2 pre-ban SA M1As, a Standard w/walnut stock and a Bush w/black fiberglass stock. I love them both. I shoot the Bush so much that my Standard has become something of a vault queen. Both rifles cost more than $1000 and both are worth every penny. You will never regret spending money to buy the best.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 8:29:19 PM EDT
This post is really wierd considering that I ordered one through my dealer this morning. I got a Springfield M1A, standard, with a walnut stock. I've wanted one for a few years now, and now I'll get it in like 3 days! I am a happy man.
Link Posted: 5/15/2003 8:36:06 PM EDT
Well, I vote for the DSA FAL. The STG 58s are sweet and cheaper (especially if you have an FFL who will do dealer cost for you. DSA is ok with it so long as the FFL is--price is $795). The savings on mags alone makes this a no-brainer.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 9:12:32 AM EDT
In BHD, the Delta sniper uses an M1A with a red-dot scope. Is this Hollywood or reality? Don't like the FAL. Strictly on aesthetics...
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 12:01:13 PM EDT
Randy Shughart favored the M14 over the M16/CAR-15's that most of the other Delta Sniper team members were using in that situation. It was an unusual choice, but at times, it worked out real well. Unfortunately, regardless of what weapons you choose, being outnumbered scores to 2 is a losing proposition, eventually the bad guys will approach from too many angles at once and a shot will sneak through, or you will simply run out of ammo. BTW, I have an M1A Supermatch that shoots very small groups, very reliably. If I were to do it again though, I'd get the NM model instead and save some weight on that honkin' huge Douglas heavy tube I lug around now.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 12:27:02 PM EDT
it depends on what you want the rifle for. if you want an M1A1 for shits and giggles or for historical value, by all means, have fun. if you're looking for a good SHTF rifle in .308, i'd get the FAL instead. the M1A1 just isn't as good as the FAL. lets face it, the M1A1 is really just a .308 Garand with a detachable magazine. that means 1930's technology. (the original garand design had a detachable mag, but the govt figured soldiers would lose the magazine in the field.) the FAL had an extra 20 years of development, and proved to be tha better rifle when matched against the M14 when the US was testing .308 rifles. the us went with the m14 for political reasons (the govt didn't want our boys carrying a foreign rifle... even if it was a better design). if you want a real world example of the FALs worth, consider that 93 countires adopted it. How many countries adopted the M14? you could probably count them on one hand. (hell, even our closest allies, the brits, went with the FAL). the M1A1 can be very accurate, but it's an inherently inferior design, and requres a lot more babying to keep it in tip top form. when you consider that the FAL is a much better platform for optics, and that the magazines are cheap and plentiful, compared to the M1A1's expensive and hard to find mags, the practical choice is obvious. (of course, theres nothing wrong with a less practical gun, if you really want one. it's your money. have fun with it.)
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 12:40:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/16/2003 12:46:45 PM EDT by Derek45]
I've had My M1A for many years. Unlike my ARs, AKs, FALs, etc., it's been 100% reliable. Mine is all USGI, standard grade, with a chrome lined USGI barrel. Yes, The FAL is a very fine weapon, and mags are cheap. However, it did not fare better than the M14 in testing. They came out about even. The M14 was selected because it was lighter, had less parts, a self regualting gas system, parts and familiarity with the Garand. It fits me better than the FAL or anything else. I love all my rifles, but My M1A is a joy to behold. I've had more fun and less problems with My M1A, than any other rifle. It's reliable, powerfull, accurate, ergonomic and very cool.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 2:46:30 PM EDT
You will love the looks you get when you pull this out at the range. I get a ton of "old timers" that used the M14 in the service and they always want to squeeze off a shot or two from mine. [img]http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-3/76435/NYENBPQEGT-TMOYTPLEAFK[MBLLULSS-S.F. M1A 3.JPG[/img]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 2:59:34 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 3:06:04 PM EDT
I like my M1A but it's a bit finicky, more so than my AR. Most likely it needs a few hundred dollars in custom smithing to be what I think it should.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 3:26:09 PM EDT
yes M1A! i love my standard so much i went out and bought its little brother the other day and am currently agonizing for the waiting period to get over so i can pick up my Scout/Squad!
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 3:34:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By theseacow: So, I have a freind that knows a dealer, that has a brand new, never been fired springfield m1a (synthetic) standard. He would sell it to me for about two hundred bucks off of normal marketing price to me, if I want it.
View Quote
What do you mean by "normal marketing price"? $200 bucks off typical street price or $200 off retail price. Retail for the synthetic is $1320, can be found for $1000-$1050 on the street. If it's only $200 off retail, it really isn't much of a deal. Rocko
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 4:12:05 PM EDT
Get the M1A.I've got a pre ban standard and love it.I've also got a STG58(FAL) with Izzy furniture.I'll take the M1A hands down any day.Yes the mags are a lot more expensive for the M1A but after you buy them they will last a lifetime.My M1A will eat absolutely anything. Non M1A owners will tell you it's not a good optics platform... bullshit!!!!!Get a good 3 point mount like the Smith or ARMS and you are good to go.I've got the Smith and have had no problems. This is the premier M1A website.... [url]www.battlerifles.com[/url]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 4:35:00 PM EDT
I got my FN in 1982. Loved my M1A when I had one. Loved all the Garands I've had over the years. But have never replaced any part on the FN in 21 years. Not a single spring. It simply kicks ass all the time. When I put on the top cover with the scope base and mounts it is a real distance rifle. Not as good as the M1A for small groups. But it will still shoot into 2 inches at 100 yards. Used to shoot tighter groups, but now it has had 6 or 7 or 8 thousand rounds through it. All the FN needs is that aftermarket rear iron sight that is windage adjustable. Going to get one soon.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 4:41:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 6:39:21 PM EDT
Ahhhhh, the old M14 vs. FAL spat. Love it! I had a pre-ban M1A for several years and it was a very good rifle. At the same time, I also purchased an SAR-48 (Springfield's imported IMBEL FAL). I got to shoot both for quite a while and I can see how the judges had such a tough time during the trials choosing between the two. However, when my central A/C went out, I chose to sell my M1A rather than my SAR though it was a very hard choice. That was about 10 years ago and I still have the SAR-48. I wish I still had the M1A but try having your wife, and three kids, understand that one shouldn't really have a problem with the July heat when it comes to keeping a rifle. For some reason, they just didn't understand.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 6:57:48 PM EDT
AAAHHHH not the M-14 vs FAL all over. The board found both to be acceptable. The M-14 has 1/2 the parts and someone trained on the M1 could practically pick up the M-14 and go without much training ( Remember this was in the 50's at the height of US Soviet tensions, WW3 was expected to break out at any time. This meant many reservists trained on the M1 would be needed and ease of transition was very important). This crap that the FAL was adopted by so many countries is bull. The M-14 was never marketed anywhere else as all production was going toward the US military. [beathorse] [beathorse]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 7:01:03 PM EDT
I was shooting a friend of mine's M1A, and it was so sweet, I almost crapped my pants. [8)]
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 8:08:21 PM EDT
I'd love to have a FAL but since I'm in Ca I can't. I could buy an M1A but I think the rifle and mags are over priced. I've chosen the AR (which I bought before they were banned in Ca) and the M1 Garand in .308. I don't really feel outgunned with the outdated M1 in .308. Enbloc clips are cheap and can be loaded forever, the sights are fantastic, and the trigger kicks butt when worked on. I don't really regret not having an M1A, but I do wish I would have bought an FAL before they were banned here.
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 8:20:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/16/2003 8:24:15 PM EDT by Halfcocked]
Originally Posted By Zaphod: In BHD, the Delta sniper uses an M1A with a red-dot scope. Is this Hollywood or reality? Don't like the FAL. Strictly on aesthetics...
View Quote
Or would that have been an M14, forged receiver? I think the M1A is approaching out dated. It has historical significance to me and I think that is one reason to own one. What will you be using this weapon for?
Link Posted: 5/16/2003 8:26:06 PM EDT
I luv my M1-A... late 80's production SA with all milspec parts.. 100% reliable. IF I had the money, I'd get me another one and put the aimpoint on it,like BHD. I did have the SA 3rd gen scope (4/14/56) on it at one time... too damn big! (although the M21 w/ leatherwood art was decent size IMHO) just using NM site now, mucho happy!
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 9:42:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Wave:
Originally Posted By icemanat95: Randy Shughart favored the M14 over the M16/CAR-15's that most of the other Delta Sniper team members were using in that situation. It was an unusual choice, but at times, it worked out real well.
View Quote
The #1 reason I picked up an M1A Scout Squad rifle + Aimpoint.
View Quote
Wave, how do you like that set up? thats what i want to do with my scout add a 2x aimpoint.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 9:08:17 PM EDT
It will never jam.
View Quote
While ATTEMPTING to use Cavim ammo, upon firing, [b]EVERY SINGLE[/b] empty case stuck in the chamber. That ammo's garbage. I agree with paul; M1As are nice, but to me, it isn't worth what they ask for it. The one I had came from the factory with a well-used GI synthetic stock on it. For as much as SA wants for 'em, the f*ckin' thing could have at least had a new stock.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 9:41:23 PM EDT
M1A's are over priced, but its cause of supply and demand, moderate demand + one supple = jacked up prices. Paid $1500 for my NM and don't regret one penny of it. I had my first AR for 4 years befoe I got the M1A, i've put about 3 times the ammo thru the M1A, it's that much more fun to shoot. Recoil is great (as in the same as an AR to me) with the punch of .308 . Yeah, mags are expensive, but how many will you buy? 3 or 4? If you have the money, buy it, if you dont like it, i'll give you $500 for it [:D] . Sure you can get a less expensive battle rifle, but the feel of shooting a M1A is one word, SOLID.
Link Posted: 5/17/2003 10:35:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2003 10:45:36 PM EDT by bruh44]
I've got a M1A scout, I love it. Never had any problems, and very accurate. I went shooting with a friend who had a FAL. The big difference I saw was that the FAL was front end heavy, so you could pull the trigger as fast as possible and be semi-accurate. The M1A doesn't do that quite as well. The muzzle climb is too much for rapid fire... or so I thought. But I didn't like the FAL because it was uncomfortable to shoot standing up because of the heavy barrel, and the trigger pull sucked. The M1A is well distributed wieght, and a very smooth trigger. Though I've heard a bunch of people say SA is not reliable anymore, Im pretty happy with them so far. Check this site out. www.battlerifles.com
Top Top