Springfield Armory Standard M1A. Fred's synthetic stock. Harris bipod on a #2 inset adapter.
Leupold VX-II 3-9x40
Leupold quick release 1" medium rings
ARMS #18 scope mount

Just got my order from SWFA with my ARMS #18, & Leupold 3-9x40. It took me, literally, 2 hours to get the ARMS *close* to be straight and level. Seriously, I have to monkey with it at least 6-8 times to get the stupid mount to sit close to straight on the bore. The first few times I installed it, according to the provided instructions, it would yaw to the right, meaning that my scope would aim to the right off the center line of the bore. This was very noticeable if you stood above the rifle looking down on top of it.

So then I decided to take out the front screw which retains the front receiver contact point. It looked like it was hitting the handguard. Well, it was. So the screw is history. Not to mention what the screw does to the front contact adjustment "pad". I removed the pad and inspected it, (sorry, no pics), and the screw was flattening the threads of the pad. No duh, I guess it's supposed to do that.

So, I tightened everything as best as I could, and have removed the retaining screw from the front of the mount. The contact pad is still there, and is tightened down onto the receiver.

The scope appears to be closer to the center line of the bore now. I'm going to get to the range as soon as possible, with Wednesday or Thursday being the most likely time. I am really hoping that this setup is going to work out.

Anyone else have a similar problem, or know a good cure? And don't say "no optics,", that's why I have the q/r rings, so I can switch back to the irons fairly quickly.

Well, I wasn't dreaming. I just got back from the range. Either the ARMS #18 is out of whack, or the receiver is.

I had to turn the elevation screw on the Leupold up to it's highest point, and it was still shooting 6-8 inches LOW, @ 100yds. I am beyond pissed.

You shell out $1300 on a rifle, and another $550 for good optics, and what do you get? 8 inches low, and no idea how to fix it.

The Springfield Receivers are out of spec. Since they ran out of USGI parts, they've been manufacturing their own, and with the cast receivers, they felt like they needed to beef up certain areas. As a result, they're not EXACTLY mil-spec.


If you want a rail that will fit the new SA receivers properly, you'll need to get the Smith Enterprise mount. They have taken into account the alterations that SA incorporated into the receiver.

Quoted: The Springfield Receivers are out of spec. Since they ran out of USGI parts, they've been manufacturing their own, and with the cast receivers, they felt like they needed to beef up certain areas. As a result, they're not EXACTLY mil-spec. If you want a rail that will fit the new SA receivers properly, you'll need to get the Smith Enterprise mount. They have taken into account the alterations that SA incorporated into the receiver.

I was leaning in that direction, but it makes me feel better to hear it. I'm hoping I can return that mount now.....

Read the Sadlak website........

http://sadlak.com/si_m1a_receivers.html

Since they sell scope mounts, they have addressed the problem thoroughly.

Quoted: Read the Sadlak website........ http://sadlak.com/si_m1a_receivers.html Since they sell scope mounts, they have addressed the problem thoroughly.

So can I safely go with the SEI mount, or do I need to think about a Sadlak mount? I'm so confused...

ETA: I read the page about GI spec, and I'd really like to avoid having to ship my rifle off to get machined.

Wow........   I want a mount for my "new"    M1A/M14 ....?

     Who's mount's should I be looking at for my rifle ??  

                                 thanx......

 

Springfield has always cast its own recievers.  I dont know exactly what the arms18 mount
looks like but if it is like a copy of the brookfield the side bolt cam adjustment is for rough elevation, incase you are shooting longrange you can give it 20MOA if needed
If this mount has that adjustment. center your elevation in the scope and adjust it in with the
mount first  2inches high at 100yds would be good. Hope this helps
also that contact screw and pad you removed is needed to make this mount more stable.
contact arms about this problem, if raising the scope rough adjustment up does not cure your problem.

Quoted: Springfield has always cast its own recievers.  I dont know exactly what the arms18 mount looks like but if it is like a copy of the brookfield the side bolt cam adjustment is for rough elevation, incase you are shooting longrange you can give it 20MOA if needed If this mount has that adjustment. center your elevation in the scope and adjust it in with the mount first  2inches high at 100yds would be good. Hope this helps also that contact screw and pad you removed is needed to make this mount more stable. contact arms about this problem, if raising the scope rough adjustment up does not cure your problem.

As best as I can tell, there is no adjustment there. There is a mount bolt/screw, which is held in place by means of a e-clip on the reverse side of the mount. Then there is the rear mount whch replaces the clip guide, and then the third is the contact pad on the top front of the receiver. Basically, bolt on and tighten down. There are no adjustments to the mount itself.

So back to the question, will the Smith Enterprise mount fix my problem, or do I see about getting the mount area of the receiver re-machined? (I really don't want to try and send the rifle off. Loed knows how much of a backlog there is.)

IM sent.

Quoted: IM sent.

Got it. Thanks a bunch. Keep your head down.

The smith enterprise mount IS a copy of the USGI brookfield design, with the adjustment I described. and that adjustment will take care of the not having enough elevation. THE problem you described and complained about on your second post.

Another vote for the Smith mount. My was easy to mount and is dead on at 200 yards.