Help choosing a model M1a

[Kraziken]

So initially, I was attracted to the short barrelled versions of the M1a, first the Socom II, then the Socom 16. But now I'm leaning toward a Scout in 18" barrel, it looks nicely balanced. It still gives up 4" to the normal 22" m1a.

Am I losing much bullet performance or accuracy with the loss of 4 inches?

Thanks

 

[sholling]

I'm far from an expert on M1As but I chose the Scout as a nice combination of handiness and range. The gurus tell me it should be good for 800yds. That's way farther than my eyes are good for. The only thing about the M1A in general is that they weren't designed to be scoped. It can be done and there are lots of mounts but none floats my boat. That's ok with me because plan to mainly use it with open sights, but I do have a Bassett scope mount and a Karsten cheek rest should I decide to use a scope.

 

[Flatbush Harry]

My experience with the SOCOM 16 has been entirely favorable.

HC

 

[roklok]

I went with the "Bush Rifle" model which is not seen very often anymore. It is the same as the Scout, except with a flash hider and without forward optics rail. I believe it or the Scout is a good choice, enough barrel to get good performance but still be handy in confined spaces. If you mount optics, you may even see better accuracy as compared to a standard 22" as the barrel should be a bit stiffer. Mine is an excellent shooter.

 

[madcratebuilder]

With the M1A the function of the gas system and the fit of the receiver/barrel assembly in the stock effect accuracy more than barrel length. You well see little if any difference with the shorter barrel.

 

[KChen986]

If I never planned to turn my M1A in to an extreme long distance shooter, I would think that the 18" is a far better all around rifle.

As others have said, 18" gives you enough velocity and, being shorter gives the barrel greater rigidity. Further, an 18" barrel is far more maneuverable than a 22" barrel--especially because you're tacking on 2" with a flashhider.

So, in the end, perhaps you lose a couple hundred FPS, but you'll still have an accurate, far reaching, hard hitting, maneuverable rifle....

*Edit:* Similar topic discussed on another forum: http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=349300

 

[lipadj46]

I started out wanting a SOCOM 16 and even put it on layaway. Then I decide that my first M1A should be a full sized rifle so I ended up buying the Loaded model and am glad I did. I like the scout but I believe that everyone's first M1a should be a standard sized and then you can get a scout or SOCOM (you can't have just one.). The loaded model gives you a lot of bang for buck, at least it did before the election. I would not touch an SAI at these inflated prices instead I would look for a Chinese M14 for $700 -$900.

 

[AK103K]

I've owned M1A's with all three barrel lengths. If I was to get another, it would be a standard grade, standard rifle.

The little bit you lose in barrel length really doesnt change the handling of the gun, you lose performance and commonality of parts, and it still weighs about 9 pounds.

The shorter guns use non standard parts, and the smaller you go, the worse the sights get and the more the sight settings change from standard. The SOCOM sights are a short range affair, and anything approaching 100 yards and beyond becomes a challenge.

Springfields rail, which is not mil spec (or at least mine wasnt) is better replaced with an Ultimak. The SOCOM's, and some of their other glass stocks I've seen, are nothing but badly done over USGI glass stocks and best replaced as well.

 

[flight954]

Socom 16

 

[indianhead]

Does anyone know where Springfields are made? I thought that the M1A was made in Japan. Not sure. While we're at it how about the 1911 ? Just curious.

 

[lipadj46]

I thought that the M1A was made in Japan.

Wow where did you even hear that? Never mind probably a gun shop or a gun show when someone was trying to sell you what they had in stock. Springfields are (and have always been) made in the USA in the same town that the Simpsons is set in, google is your friend. The individual parts are made in some far flung areas though, like the receiver is made in brazil I believe.

 

[azredhawk44]

I've owned a Springer M1A Scout and loved it.

I started building a custom M14 with a full length barrel and sold the Springer when I completed the project rifle. Wish I kept the Springer, too. Oh, well.

Many folks have opined that the 18" barrel length may be optimal for the rifle. There is less flex or whip of the barrel, the shorter it gets. I saw about 1.25 MOA from my rifle, without any gas system alignment or unitizing, no upgrades at all from the stock rifle. These were match handloads.

I'm still learning what my new M14 likes, so I haven't done better with handloads... but I did shoot a fluke 0.01" group at 100 yards with 150gr Magtech retail ammo. Could I repeat it? Heck no. But it was pretty cool. Blind squirrels, broken clocks and such.

I personally favor the 22" barrel, though. Longer sight radius. If you use optics, the scout is optimal, I think.

 

[Kraziken]

Thanks for the opinions (and the article link).

At least with their tested load, it seemed the .308 lost 32fps from a 20" to an 18". And a 20" had no velocity loss than a 22". Of course this testing is with just one particular load (federal Match 168 grain).

I was teetering, but I think I'm leaning toward the Scout.

 

[Bond007]

M1A Scout

I really love my Scout model and couldn't recommend it highly enough. I decided that I didn't think I would get the additional distance out of the standard sized, but didn't feel the need to go any smaller than 18".

The iron sights are great out to at least 300 yards:

The scope mount has held a Leupold 4x28 EER handgun scope in place for a few years now as well: