I have two M1As, no bolt guns. One M1A is a standard (1996) and the other is a "loaded" model (also circa 1996) with the black synthetic stock.  Since I have no bolt guns but am very interested in precision shooting right now, would it be worth it to put a scope (I have a Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14X) and Harris bi-pod on it and use that as my "fix" for precision shooting...or just continue to save for a Remington 700?

For the price of a 700 you can do much for your 14's accuracy.  Shop around for accessories and check out www.m-14forum.com .  They have a wealth of information.

Get a mount from Smith, and scope your M1A

A great 700 or stock 40X will group under .5 with the right ammo.  A fully built M1a (read super match or M-21) will group just under MOA, but not too long since the glass bedding with go south.

Having said that, you need a bolt gun if you going scoped 600 yards or better.  And the fact that you have spent a grand or more on a few other rifles, forget  the 700 and shop for the 40X instead.  This will save you lot of trouble since the rifle come fully built from the factory custom shop and will shot less than 1/2 MOA during their testing (you get the target with the rifle to show you what it does with there ammo).

Quoted: A great 700 or stock 40X will group under .5 with the right ammo.  A fully built M1a (read super match or M-21) will group just under MOA, but not too long since the glass bedding with go south.

Put your M1A in a SAGE stock and the bedding will NEVER go south.
You also get the benefit of a semi-floated barrel and a solid scope platform.

The M-14 barrel is too thin in the later section of the barrel, and with the gas cyclinder tension compounded by the FS weight, the barrel need tension to shoot their best.  Trust me, too may people have tried to Float the barrels, only to be back at square one which is tension is needed on the barrels to make them group. The M1 Garand has the same problem (if you want call it that), and this is why the middle band clip also pulls down on the barrel.  

As far as glass bedding, it doesn't matter if you steel inbedded glass or Dupoint, over time the bedding is going to break down, which leads to flyers/shifts in POI in the groups.

As for a scope on a m-14/M1A, never going to happen on any of the ones I own.  If I want a 308 combat rifle, there is more than enough HK's in the safe, so why screw up one of my match rifles playing wantabe dress up.  And really, if you need to scope a rig, then the M-40 is the platform of choice for long range or if you do need to go semi/full, the SR-25 fits the bill nicely.

No flame intended, just my take on the whole SAGE concept.

Quoted: The M-14 barrel is too thin in the later section of the barrel, and with the gas cyclinder tension compounded by the FS weight, the barrel need tension to shoot their best.   As far as glass bedding, it doesn't matter if you steel inbedded glass or Dupoint, over time the bedding is going to break down, which leads to flyers/shifts in POI in the groups. No flame intended, just my take on the whole SAGE concept.

Dano523, IMHO your take on the SAGE concept is flawed - no flame intended here.

The barrel is semi-floated from the op rod guide forward and the receiver is
tension bedded in the SAGE stock. Trust me, there is nothing to break down.

There are some great pictures of this on Brobee's web site. LINK

playing wantabe dress up

I'm pretty sure the U.S.N. and U.S.A.F. do not consider
their SEI CH Mk 14 Mod 0 EBR's wantabe dress up play toys.

Quoted: A great 700 or stock 40X will group under .5 with the right ammo.  A fully built M1a (read super match or M-21) will group just under MOA, but not too long since the glass bedding with go south.

I think you will find with some research that while the bedding of an M14 does need maintenence, it does not fall into the  "quickly" or "not too long" time frames.
When the '14 ruled the competition arena, most match rifles had the bedding re-done once a year. And this after a season's worth of serious, constant practice and competition. In other words, more rounds in a year than most here will put through a "precision" rig in many years.

gotta have both

As far as M1a's go I had a Supermatch built by Champion's Choice it was a nice rifle but it was way to heavy.

I would go back to the 9822 loaded model if I bought another M1A. I currently have a para FAL.



Bolt guns, had 2 PSS's and a Sendero all in .300RUM the Sendero shot the best.

 I have a Tikka Tactical and a Serbu now.

 I would keep the loaded model and sell the standard M1A.

Buy a Sendero in .300RUM, load your own using 220gr Sierra's, 85 grains of RL25 = 3000fps.

You will have an accurate rifle and a heavier bullet that will be less affected by wind.

$0.02

 

W_G If I were in your shoes I'd keep saving for the Remmy.

Mind you I love the M1a; I simply think that there is room in the arsenal (In my case) for a precision bolt gun.

You should put up a poll.  

Quoted: I would keep the loaded model and sell the standard M1A.

Not going to happen.

40X? Eh?

(goes off to Google)

IMO - given your stated goal and equipment - I would go with the M1A. M1A will provide you with 2-3 1/2" groups that will test your skills. If you then decide to go the precision route plan to spend as much on your glass as your initial rifle cost - then there is the build out of the rifle.

I'm pretty sure the U.S.N. and U.S.A.F. do not consider their SEI CH Mk 14 Mod 0 EBR's wantabe dress up play toys.

I'm guessing that the poster meant that this sort of configuration has no useful civilian application, and, while non of my business what someone does with their rifle or money, I would tend to agree.  Unless, of course, you simply want a $3,000,  16 pound "M1A"...

Quoted: I'm guessing that the poster meant that this sort of configuration has no useful civilian application...

Yeah, they are folks that think no sort of configuration is useful in civilian hands even if it's light weight and cheap.

Quoted: Quoted: I'm guessing that the poster meant that this sort of configuration has no useful civilian application... Yeah, they are folks that think no sort of configuration is useful in civilian hands even if it's light weight and cheap.

No, I was just introduced to the M1 Garand and the M-14/M1A as target rifles for the DCM program when I stepped up from NRA small bore.  When I look at the M1/M14 rifles, target shooting is what comes to mind, and that’s how I see them in their true form for me.  Like I stated, when I think battle rifle in 308, The G-3 or FAL comes to mind instead.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm guessing that the poster meant that this sort of configuration has no useful civilian application... Yeah, they are folks that think no sort of configuration is useful in civilian hands even if it's light weight and cheap. No, I was just introduced to the M1 Garand and the M-14/M1A as target rifles for the DCM program when I stepped up from NRA small bore.  When I look at the M1/M14 rifles, target shooting is what comes to mind, and that’s how I see them in their true form for me.  Like I stated, when I think battle rifle in 308, The G-3 or FAL comes to mind instead.

Understood