Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/9/2003 1:41:22 AM EDT
This can go on forever, so let me narrow the debate to what applies to me. ASSUMING '04' goes well for us, I would like to upgrade my 7.62 X 51 cantidate. The most likely choices are between the Armalite AR-10 (non-match carbine) and the Springfield Armory M1A. This weapon would be intended primarily as a SHTF 7.62, with a secondary role of occasional practice/recreational plinking.

The following comprise my assesment of the two:

Armalite AR-10

Pros:
-Complements training with AR-15.
-Barrel/upper interchangability.
-Solid manufacturer with good QA.
Cons:
-Way too damn expensive
-Magazines are now & will likely be way too damn expensive.
-MY IMPRESSION is that there are more design flaws in the AR-10 vs the M1A

Springfield Armory

Pros:
-I have always admired them & wanted one.
-reasonable cost on parts and magazines

Cons:
-Way too damn expensive.
-While SA will fix any problems, you're as likely to get a masterwork as you are a lemon
-Milspec parts are drying up fast.

If I thought a few more min. I could probably double the pros/cons list for each. What would you suggest for the purposes I stated?
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 1:46:51 AM EDT
I'd take the M1A.

It's cleaner. No gas blowing crap back into the action.

It's a former Miltary rifle. THat makes it alot easier to find parts. I'm sure there are AR-10 parts out there, but im guessing the M1A parts are more plentiful.

OVerall, i jsut like the design of the M1A better. Similiar design as the M1 Garand, M1 carbine, Mini-14, M1A1....THat design woudn't keep being used if it was flawed.

Link Posted: 6/9/2003 1:55:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 1:55:42 AM EDT by Lumpy196]
One has a history of field proven reliability, the other doesnt...by a long shot. I'll let you do your research on which is which.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 3:49:07 AM EDT
point taken.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 4:23:27 AM EDT
i would get the M1A.
it's not as finicky with regard to maintenance.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 6:08:45 AM EDT
Would the AR-10 be the choice if optics are important? Better platform for optics.

Sights are super on the M1A.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 6:27:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ALAN308:
Would the AR-10 be the choice if optics are important? Better platform for optics.

Sights are super on the M1A.



M1A is difficult to scope accutately - AR-10A4 much easier - accuracy AR-10.

One of our members said something like....."only accurate guns remain interesting."
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 6:42:32 AM EDT
M1A.

Although, I am a BIG AR fan, I can give a few reasons for why, IMO.

Since you stated that it was primarily a SHTF 7.62, the history of reliability comes to the forefront. Secondly in regard to SHTF, I am assuming that you don't want to get shot. A very reliable source spouted some statistics to me this week about wound locations on soldiers in Vietnam. Apparently, an overwhelming number of wounds were suffered from the shoulders up, which was accounted for by the higher sight plane of the AR system vs. that of the M1/M14 sights.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 6:58:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:

Originally Posted By ALAN308:
Would the AR-10 be the choice if optics are important? Better platform for optics.

Sights are super on the M1A.



M1A is difficult to scope accutately - AR-10A4 much easier - accuracy AR-10.

One of our members said something like....."only accurate guns remain interesting."



I should have added that I shoot only with a scope and if a rifle is hard to scope I'm not in it !! Although I do love the old preban FAL's scoping them accurately is a bitch. So far as H&K's..........forget it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:27:35 AM EDT
The M1A is easy to properly scope. but you must buy an ARMS mount. then buy 1 set or ARMS rings and you will be all set. then simply flip off the scope rings and you have an iron sighted rifle ready to fire. 2 seconds.

with the AR-10 you need ARMS rings (med or high)front sight and rear sight. then you flip off the rings and flip up the irons and fire. 4 seconds
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:39:33 AM EDT
As far as optics are concerned, I have not made any decisions. I still have to pay my dues for a while on the iron sights and once I have done so, optics will become more significant. It comes as no coincidence either that my "dues" occur at a time when such big ticket items as a high quality tactical scope are a little too pricey to consider. Optics will doubtlessly be on the horizon for me and thus, will require some consideration as far as my choice is concerned.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:43:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pulpsmack:
As far as optics are concerned, I have not made any decisions. I still have to pay my dues for a while on the iron sights and once I have done so, optics will become more significant. It comes as no coincidence either that my "dues" occur at a time when such big ticket items as a high quality tactical scope are a little too pricey to consider. Optics will doubtlessly be on the horizon for me and thus, will require some consideration as far as my choice is concerned.



what the hell does that mean?
are you saying you can't afford a Leupold?

so buy a Tasco world class or a propoint and get the Leupy when you can afford it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 9:28:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 308wood:

what the hell does that mean?
are you saying you can't afford a Leupold?

so buy a Tasco world class or a propoint and get the Leupy when you can afford it.



Notice the weapons I am describing? My philosophy is to buy what is right the first time, not pick up something I can afford, only to discover it is either a piece of shit and/or it doesn't fit with my overall plans for the weapon. What does "as far as optics are concerned I have not made any decisions" mean? It means: AS FAR AS OPTICS ARE CONCERNED I HAVE NOT MADE ANY DECISIONS. What sits on top of the weapon is more often than not the most expensive accessory you will ever put on your rifle, and the dizzying array of choices, sizes, functions, and prices makes the optics department one of the most confusing aspects of the selection process.

I build the scope around the rifle, not the rifle around the scope, and since I am in the infancy of this rifle selection process, the optics question is moot. The only question that needs to be addressed is "will the rifle incorporate optics in the future" and that answer is "yes". Now that we have the understanding that further questions I have about the optics issue on this or any other rifle will be addressed in the proper forum at the proper time, we can return to the actual issue.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:03:22 AM EDT
pulpsmack...

Here's my take on the situation. I like both guns, equally well. They both have military history. They both can be made to be reliable. As far as accuracy goes...Well, I've never met an AR-10 that didn't shoot sub-moa right out of the box. I've met plenty of M1A's that couldn't reach 1 moa, no matter what you do to them. It's hit or miss with them. IIWY, I'd go for an Eagle Arms E10A2BM. They hover around the $1000 mark, and will accept modified M1A magazines. It's got iron sights, and is set-up just an A2 M-16, When you're ready for a scoped rifle, send the thing to George Gardner at GA Precision. He works wonder with the AR-10, and builds his guns from EA receivers. The M1A is a great gun, but just takes too much money, and a bit of voodoo magic, to make very accurate. That's why "match" M1As go for the price of a solid used car. The AR-10 is the way to go, but go with the Eagle Arms version. It's not as frilly, and you don't get the "lifetime" warranty, but I'never known anybody that did need it.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:30:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 308wood:
The M1A is easy to properly scope. but you must buy an ARMS mount. then buy 1 set or ARMS rings and you will be all set. then simply flip off the scope rings and you have an iron sighted rifle ready to fire. 2 seconds.

with the AR-10 you need ARMS rings (med or high)front sight and rear sight. then you flip off the rings and flip up the irons and fire. 4 seconds



.308W,
forgetting the present topic, take a look at ArmaLite's one-piece mount (1" or 30mm) for one of your flattops. I had a conversation with one of ArmaLite's guys about a year ago and didn't realize how much thought and planning had gone into designing that mount. Works well for me.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:40:10 AM EDT

are you talking about this bad boy?


it looks like it comes off with a screwdriver.
i think i will stick with the ARMS rings.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:42:45 AM EDT
Not to fan the potenetial flames here but...
for a TRUE SHTF type of .308 rifle, I'd have to make it a FAL. Now the M1A is a great proven design and accurate. However, it's expensive and is higher maintenance to keep in top shape. The AR10 is more accurate than the M1A and is easier to keep in "fighting shape" BUT it too is very expensive and mags are expensive (same with M1A). The AR10 is gradually proving itself in the field as a sniper rifle (a George Gardner AR10 won the national sniper competition), but as a SHTF rifle, I don't know much about it. Compared to the M1A and the AR10, the FAL is cheap. Mags are really cheap. It's certainly proven.
Just my $.02


Rich
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:45:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 308wood:

are you talking about this bad boy?
www.armalite.com/shared/images/armalite_scope_mount200.gif

it looks like it comes off with a screwdriver.
i think i will stick with the ARMS rings.



Those are big, knurled knobs. You can use a screwdriver, but it's not necessary.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:47:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 10:50:36 AM EDT by 5subslr5]
Pulps.,
first let me make everyone aware that I'm AR15.com's mod in the AR-10 & AR-180 Forum and my opinions should be considered in that light.


I've had only one M1A1 and that was a fine rifle. As I've said before, I do believe accurately scopeing a flattop AR-10 is easier and since I readily admit I don't shoot with irons scopeing may be more important to me than most.

As to the AR-10's..........the last year or so has brought about something a little different re these rifles. The AR-10(T) has always been recognized as a highly accurate/sniper/target rifle and, of course, has a match barrel. Here's what I've started to see that's different. We have a many members reporting at least MOA accuracy from their standard AR-10A4's with the chrome lined barrel !! At first I sort privately questioned such results but now I've become convinced as too many report this accuracy result.
-----------------------------------------------

Regarding quality scopes or quality anything........I too have bought some junk in my time but have, over the years, become a 'value' buyer - I buy where I get the best value for my dollar and virtually always that's not the cheapest. I've also found on scopes that once I make up my mind what I want/need at least half the time I can find that scope either used or at a significant discount. Recently I bought a retail $1600 US Optics used for $900.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:49:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 308wood:

are you talking about this bad boy?
www.armalite.com/shared/images/armalite_scope_mount200.gif

it looks like it comes off with a screwdriver.
i think i will stick with the ARMS rings.



That B it. perhaps 'you' should stick with ARMS rings.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 3:46:03 PM EDT
The AR10.
"Bridge to the 21st Century..." (did I just say that?)
It's modern and maturing like the AR that it is.
I'd practice/recreate like hell with it, and IF the S ever HTF, I'd KNOW it would work as intended.
Sold yet?
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 4:30:16 PM EDT
I would break it down this way:

AR-10
Better optics platform. Very good iron sights. Less expensive to make and keep ultra accurate. Ultra expensive high cap mags. The M-14 conversions have some problems, but they work most of the time. If I were sniping or target shooting in competition, I'd go with the AR.

M-1A
Very good iron sights. Expensive to scope, but can be made into a good optics platform with about $300 in ARMS mounts stuff. Pre ban high cap mags for $35 in you buy lots of 10. Reliable, proven batle rifle. For SHTF, I'd go with an M-1A.

As it pertains to accuracy, the chamber is the key. If you want a SHTF weapon, you MUST go with the chrome lined NATO chamber. If you are after total accuracy, you go with a match cut .308 chamber. The two are NOT the same. A target shooter, (i.e. me), has his target AR in .223 SAAMI, but his SHTF weapons in 5.56 or 7.62 NATO.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 5:38:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 5:42:01 PM EDT by ZRH]
A note before you read this, I dont own either of these rifles but I am currently looking into getting a semi-auto .308 and these are the summary of my research so far.

M1A/M14:

SA sucks but you dont "have" to get a SA M1A. There are better ones out there, they just cost more. To tell the truth I like M1As much better than AR-10s but the fact is that 90% of M1As/M14s are made by SA and therefore crap by all accounts.

The only other real option is to get an Armscorp M14 or have Fulton Armory make one out of a polytech/norinco reciever.

I would get one as long as it had a chrome barrel.

AR-10:
I really wouldnt buy one because they dont have any historic value (a major consideration for me), you generally cant get them in the original configuration and Armalite seems to be starting to act like SA recently with their "quality" control. I basically would get an SR-25 if I had the money but I dont see spending $3000+ to outfit a rifle that will mostly be for plinking and mabey varmit killin'.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 6:37:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ZRH:
A note before you read this, I dont own either of these rifles but I am currently looking into getting a semi-auto .308 and these are the summary of my research so far.

M1A/M14:

SA sucks but you dont "have" to get a SA M1A. There are better ones out there, they just cost more. To tell the truth I like M1As much better than AR-10s but the fact is that 90% of M1As/M14s are made by SA and therefore crap by all accounts.

The only other real option is to get an Armscorp M14 or have Fulton Armory make one out of a polytech/norinco reciever.

I would get one as long as it had a chrome barrel.

AR-10:
I really wouldnt buy one because they dont have any historic value (a major consideration for me), you generally cant get them in the original configuration and Armalite seems to be starting to act like SA recently with their "quality" control. I basically would get an SR-25 if I had the money but I dont see spending $3000+ to outfit a rifle that will mostly be for plinking and mabey varmit killin'.



ZRH,
a bit of advice - don't try to argue history until you know history.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:15:10 PM EDT
......can`t belive we`re rehashing this again.......ANYWAY...both will do the job...just a decision of which one you buy first........EITHER rifle will do the 200-300 yard hit.....both have a military history AND both are being used...as we read..right now...answer...GET BOTH....which first?...up to you...IF you have a garand...get the ar...if you don`t have a garand..get the m-1a first...just my suggestion.......
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 10:48:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:
ZRH,
a bit of advice - don't try to argue history until you know history.



Hey its just my experiance looking for one so far.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 11:17:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:

Originally Posted By ALAN308:
Would the AR-10 be the choice if optics are important? Better platform for optics.

Sights are super on the M1A.



M1A is difficult to scope accutately - AR-10A4 much easier - accuracy AR-10.

One of our members said something like....."only accurate guns remain interesting."




Towsend Whelen is quoted as saying that "only accurate guns are interesting".
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 11:24:27 PM EDT
The AR10 predates the AR15. The Sudanese bought some in the late 50s.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 11:51:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 11:53:10 PM EDT by 5subslr5]

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The AR10 predates the AR15. The Sudanese bought some in the late 50s.



The lineage is the AR-3, AR-10 and then the AR-15. Stoner designed the AR-3 & the AR-10 while Sullivan & Fremont designed the AR-15.

(Portugal and a couple of other countries also bought the AR-10.)
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 10:10:41 AM EDT
Obviously this is a REALLY tough choice for most everyone, excluding the "AR/M14 is the god of rifles" extremists. Then the garand guys...oops..just kidding! Anyways, here's my take:

M1A-classic style, reliability is superb, S.A. does NOT suck, mag compatability with the AR-10, can accept a flash suppressor, great iron sights, and you're gonna end up with one anyway

AR-10-if you are familiar with the AR-15, this may be a good transition to the .308. Familiar controls, sights, light recoil, very easy to scope, and you can have most any configuration you want.

Try to get both at some point, they offer shooting pleasure unique to each rifle.
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 12:12:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:
One of our members said something like....."only accurate guns remain interesting."




Towsend Whelen is quoted as saying that "only accurate guns are interesting".



I was thinking that it was Col. Jeff Cooper, but I could be wrong.
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 12:49:34 PM EDT
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet (maybe I just missed it), but with the AR10, you can change it as your needs/wants change.

You can have your 20" or 16" chrome barreled SHTF rifle, and later on, when you decide you like shooting tiny little groups in paper. you can then buy a match upper to put on your AR10.

Now, you could also reverse that order and just buy the AR15.com group buy AR10 rifle with match barrel
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 4:01:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Polyak:
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet (maybe I just missed it), but with the AR10, you can change it as your needs/wants change.

You can have your 20" or 16" chrome barreled SHTF rifle, and later on, when you decide you like shooting tiny little groups in paper. you can then buy a match upper to put on your AR10.

Now, you could also reverse that order and just buy the AR15.com group buy AR10 rifle with match barrel



Same versatility as the AR-15 family of weapons. I guess that's not too surprising as the AR-10 and AR-15 were both designed at ArmaLite. I'm believing a lower and more than one upper is becoming more and more frequent these days. I have an odd mix in that I have an AR-10(T) carbine an a 10A4 rifle upper.

(I bought this AR-10(T) used and it came with the carbine upper. I've since added the rifle upper. Had I bought new I would have reversed the process.)
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 4:58:35 PM EDT
SamK, 'your gonna end up with one anyway'
that is GREAT.
My only personal dissapointment is that I did not persue a m-14 from a guy assembling them from usgi parts. I was considering buying one from him [ in w. va ] but lost contact.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 12:13:33 AM EDT
Try the M1A or M1A Scout. either has a plethora of parts and though they are NOT as accurate as the AR10 they ARE infinitely more reliable...also mags are easier to get and actually ( for once ) cheaper than someone elses mags ( AR10 twenty rounders are EXPENSIVE!!!) The M1A is still a VERY accurate rifle and has been pointed out above there are other builders out there. I reccommend Fulton Armory for either parts or rifles. My personal experience with Clint McKeee has always been great.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 8:12:58 AM EDT
Here's my shtf rifle a DSArms Medium Contour Tactical wearing the Armalite scope mount and Bushnells 3200 Elite 4X12 AO scope. Armalite's mount works well on the Tactical, it's height clears the rifles rear sight and affords ample adjustment.

I think the handling characteristics on the on Tactical are much much better than on the AR10, if you can pick them both up, you'll be amazed at the difference. The AR 10 wears it's weight like a sack of concrete, the DSA Tactical hides it's weight, it's grip and balance make it behave like an extension of your arm.

Link Posted: 6/11/2003 2:34:18 PM EDT
They both are way over priced is right!

I made the choice and went with the M1A and haven't looked back.

The ergonomics on the AR-10 are superior IMHO but the M1A isn't that bad and better than most other rifles. The biggest thing I don't like about the M1A is the way the magazines tilt in and then lock back - this ensures a very postive lock but is a bit more difficult than slap, slam, and tug.

The magazines are a killer as I have about two dozen of the $32 M1A magazines .... which would be double that for the AR-10.

Have you looked at the FAL/STG-58 weapons?
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 5:20:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/11/2003 5:21:01 PM EDT by cnatra]
given those two choices & your priorities I would get the M1A

I've owned both & sold both.

AR10 has the edge for ergonomics, inherent accuracy & optics platform
BUT IMHO has not proven itself in the reliability department for a SHTF rifle(reason I sold mine)

my M1A was extremely reliable but I didn't like the ergonomics

I currently have 3 DSA FAL variants
so you can guess which rifle I prefer

you could try the DPMS .308 AR but that would limit you to 10rd mags or expensive pre-ban Knight's mags
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 7:37:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cnatra:


you could try the DPMS .308 AR but that would limit you to 10rd mags or expensive pre-ban Knight's mags



The DPMS should solve all reliability problems - right cnatra ?? (The only problem you note is the limit to 10-round mags or expensive pre-ban Knight's mags.)
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 9:08:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ZRH:
A note before you read this, I dont own either of these rifles but I am currently looking into getting a semi-auto .308 and these are the summary of my research so far.

M1A/M14:

SA sucks but you dont "have" to get a SA M1A. There are better ones out there, they just cost more. To tell the truth I like M1As much better than AR-10s but the fact is that 90% of M1As/M14s are made by SA and therefore crap by all accounts.

The only other real option is to get an Armscorp M14 or have Fulton Armory make one out of a polytech/norinco reciever.

I would get one as long as it had a chrome barrel.

AR-10:
I really wouldnt buy one because they dont have any historic value (a major consideration for me), you generally cant get them in the original configuration and Armalite seems to be starting to act like SA recently with their "quality" control. I basically would get an SR-25 if I had the money but I dont see spending $3000+ to outfit a rifle that will mostly be for plinking and mabey varmit killin'.

What historic value does an M1A have? The ones that we can buy never saw military service and they are aftermarket semiautos. Unless you go class 3 and buy an actual M14, there is no historic value in an M1A.
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 12:29:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/12/2003 12:55:26 AM EDT by cnatra]

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:

Originally Posted By cnatra:


you could TRY the DPMS .308 AR but that would limit you to 10rd mags or expensive pre-ban Knight's mags



The DPMS should solve all reliability problems - right cnatra ?? (The only problem you note is the limit to 10-round mags or expensive pre-ban Knight's mags.)



hmmm... you inferring more from my post than was actually stated

the key word to the third suggestion is
TRY

since it is so new
the DPMS is OBVIOUSLY an unknown commodity at this time so it could be as problematic
as any other gas-impingement operated .308 rifle on the market today

BUT a different magazine design is something to consider

I know that more than a few of my problems with my AR10A2 had to do with the M14 hybrid magazines & the Armalite follower, not just the 20rd mags either, I had problems with the 10rd mags too
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 5:43:06 AM EDT
You guys are not helping me any. I have run the full course of going from AR10 to FAL to M1A. I finally settled on the M1A via a SA Scout, as my one and only semi auto .308. Just want to have one heavy support rifle (heavy caliber wise vs my 5.56's). I can get a M1A less than either the AR10 or FAL. Having to get the mags converted for the AR10 was a turn off $$ wise. I do like having the similar controls on the AR10 vs my AR15's. I like the look of the FAL the best, but, have had some concerns about clearing bad jams in a hurry (lots of reading on battlerifles.com), and the only FAL I would be happy with is a DSA and its just out of my reachable price range.
All said, the M1A Scout just fits my budget, the pro's outweighed the cons, and should work for my intended use. I do have previous experience with one so its not totally new to me.
But dang, DSA does make some freakin sweet rifles.
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 8:37:35 AM EDT
Hawk,
You might want to look the the DSA StG58's. They are military Steyr parts (the very best there ever were) built on DSA receivers. I just got a StG58 carbine in MINT condition. You can get one NIB from FAC (or direct from DSA) for $795 (plus the cost of the transfer). Can't beat that. Gotta love the cheap mags too! Take a look on falfiles.com. LOTS of info there. If a FAL has the look etc you like, don't "settle" (not to say that going with the M1A is "settling")

Later,
Rich
Link Posted: 6/13/2003 4:51:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hawkeye:
I like the look of the FAL the best, but, have had some concerns about clearing bad jams in a hurry (lots of reading on battlerifles.com),



I have an M-1A and an FAL. The M-1A has to come out of the stock in order to take the bolt out. The FAL breaks shotgun like an AR and is by far the easiest to tear down if there is anything that can't be cleared with the charging knob. Regardless of what you choose, you won't have any reliability problems if the rifle was assembeled correctly. They are both completly battle proven designs.
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 6:15:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/14/2003 7:15:13 AM EDT by philipk]

Originally Posted By Sgt_Gold:
The M-1A has to come out of the stock in order to take the bolt out.



I have not stated an opinion because I do not own any of these firearms, (though I have used them all.)

On the issue of field stripping, the guns I own are so similar that I want to state that I agree with Sgt_Gold.

I own two M1 Garands and an AR15. The AR15 is SO SUPERIOR in field stripping that the Garands seem like an antique.

Springfield Armory states in their owner's manuals for both the new Garand and the M1A to "avoid frequent field stripping" as it loosens the gun and has an impact on accuracy. Other noted Garand and M1A/M14 experts also advise against frequent field stripping. In fact it is such a problem that specialty cleaning items are made for them so that you can clean them without breaking them down.

Of course, if you only want "SHTF acceptable accuracy" this isn't a problem (<5 MOA). If you want top accuracy then it is a concern.

There are no such concerns with FAL or AR style weapons. The ergonomics of these rifles are so superior that the armies of the world have adopted them.

Think about it, what Army/Navy still uses a M14 for anything but training?

Philip
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 11:30:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 11:49:29 AM EDT
SEAL's, SF, 82nd and 101st ABN use M14's.

To quote Raf. "no flame" either.



Rich
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 6:29:07 PM EDT


The problem with this topic is there's no real problem !!

The AR-10 and the M1A1 are both pretty fine weapons and a logical argument can be built around either. Now here's my quick story. I have owned exactly one M1A1 and that rifle was tricked out and in .243 - no problems at all nice rifle. Now let's just say I've owned AR-10's from the preban days until the present. The M1A1 I owned wasn't different enough to make me switch brand loyalty - I'm still an ArmaLite guy. And that certainly doesn't mean the M1A1 is a bad rifle cause it's not.
Link Posted: 6/15/2003 4:14:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/15/2003 4:20:57 AM EDT by desertmoon]
After careful thought and much perusion I have decided the ultimate rifle for our man pulpsmack will be......drum roll, please.....

the AR 180 B


NOT!!!!
Link Posted: 6/16/2003 12:00:34 PM EDT
Hey desertmoon, reburying that hatchet?
Link Posted: 6/17/2003 6:41:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Trumpet:
SEAL's, SF, 82nd and 101st ABN use M14's.

To quote Raf. "no flame" either.



Rich



Rich,
as I'm sure you know certain elements of the US military also use the Stoner SR-25. What you might not be aware of is certain elements of the US military also use the AR-10 and at least two friendly foreign countries also are using the AR-10.
------------------------------------------------

Trumpet,
The SEAL's, SF, 82nd and 101st ABN (as well as other military units) use a mix of weapons - depending on the mission - of which the M-14 is but one. (I expect you already knew this.)

------------------------------------------------

I like the fact that the AR-10 is being used by various militaries as the end result will be a better rifle for us all.

The AR-10 is continuing to evolve but heck for that matter so is the M-16 and after all these years !!
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top