Okay so all this talk of long range shooting has seen me bitten by the buy a new gun bug.

At first I was looking at getting a Remington 700 AAC-SD, but by the time I started looking a new stock and optics I saw the price climb and climb. This got me thinking that for the same .308 I could dump that same amount of cash into the M1A I've always wanted. To be fair I want both weapons just a matter of which one first.

With the 700 I have to invest in glass, rings, and base before I can put rounds down range. I'm not a fan of the buy cheap stuff then upgrade later. Buy once cry once.

With the M1A I can pull it out of the box and shoot as it has the great irons IMHO.

I know both weapons can reach out and touch a target. It has been over four years since I have shot over 200 yards and a 700 seems like such a waste shooting 100-200 yards.

The question is do I go with a bolt gun that has greater accuracy potential that may rarely get used or go with the semi auto that I wouldn't feel like wasting time at shorter distances?

The final issue is finding the right M1A that is in stock for a fair price. The 700 could be in my hands in less than a week.

Well I am in the process of doing something very similar. I how ever am looking at a howa 1500 based on septic's and others experiences with them.
























 

the stock 700s aren't uber accurate in most cases and have super long chambers...  so when you run a DBM and are bound by a shorter OAL, you won't be able to push the projo close to the lands, if that is important to you.

the chassis systems have come down in price too.  aics is ok, but the xlr and mcrees stuff is really good and they are really cost competitive when compared to a stock like a mac or manners with an added dbm, attachment points, etc.

i know where you can pick up a tactical tricked out M1A, but they typically aren't very accurate, are way heavy, and will not have much of a trigger.  all that can be cured with big money, but it isn't really worth it unless you just want to say you have one...

i'd run a 1500 over the 700 or savage any day if you were going to keep them mostly stock in terms of barrel, trigger, etc.

there is too much to go over via net, so if you want to give me a call, then i'd be glad to lend you a hand.  IM me and i'll give you my cell number...

hope this helps,


michael

I have an M1A that I bought from a fine gentleman on here. It's a good shooter (for an M1A) but in no way would I consider it a "precision rifle" like my FN/700. Now, neother one of those are custom/re-bbl'd guns, but they shoot as well as I can at this point.

I bought the M1A because, well, I've always wanted one. Had the page torn out of the Springfield catalog since I was 12 or so. I love it for what it is, and put an optic on it b/c my eyes suck.

Please don't misunderstand, I get that an M1A is pretty far from a precision rifle. My main point of contention is the distinct lack of long range shooting options in our state.

My considerations for an M1A over say a Remington 700 or Howa 1500 (thanks for the heads up on that Septic) is that I can quickly see a precision rifle becoming a safe queen. I can quickly see a dedicated precision rifle as something to have in the rare case that a long range shooting chance pops up or simply to say I have one.

Depending on how the potential up coming long range shoot is set up in the other thread I may just end up buying a true scope for my AR and seeing what I can do with that an some 77 gr match ammo. If I find I really enjoy the longer range game I can always pull the scope for a precision rifle.

I appreciate the feedback and one of the many reasons I love this place.

Understood. Really, for what I shoot, I could do it with a .223, just not as well. That said, my precision rifle is also my hunting rig for high power in Iowa and rifle season back in VA on occassion.

If distance is your concern, I sure as heck wouldn't be throwing expensive 308 downrange when a lesser caliber would suffice if there wasn't an end-game.