Yeah your right it, sorry about that the m1a damn good, that target is a what smaller than a pie plate! Thats really damn good.No love for the M1A
- Thread starter Givemem14
- Start date
Target is a standard Military 100 yard SR-1.
X = 1.35 inches
10 = 3.35
9 = 6.35 inches
Guess we need not go further.
Distinguished shooters would laugh at my bags and shit while shooting a tighter group off hand.
Last edited:
I won't stand down range from them.
Because of places like this and what is available for gear, expectations and results have really come up for those that shoot.
They won't break the bank but on a SOCOM style M1A why bother.
I looked for a long time to find an M1A that was as close to issue as could be.
Lots of GI parts to include the barrel, 71K serial number, shoots better than I was expecting.
Really thanks for the recommendation with the NM.
Yeah i had a lot of issues zeroing mine scoped. When i tried to zero the irons the height over bore was always really off. The round would be low very very low. We would aim at the head or above it to get the shots on paper
Attachments
The front sight being too low on a scout will send the rounds high.
With the longer sight radius if the full length barrel the GI spec front sight works fine.
With the longer sight radius if the full length barrel the GI spec front sight works fine.
Nothing wrong with eating monkey meat in Olongapo
!? .....after a few dozen San Miguels and a short time !
There is LRB, Bula Forge, Springfield, Smith Enterprise, Polytech, and a few others I can't remember right now.
Some of the early Springfield Armory Inc. Rifles were made in Devine, TX and are highly sought after.
I have a Fulton Armory receivered 18.5" Franken Scout, and a Glen Nelson built rear lugged Supermatch. The Supermatch is extremely accurate when I have my shit together. It will shoot sub moa when I have my fundamentals together.
I pulled that outside shot on the 4th round. Didn't have my shit together on that one.
Some of the early Springfield Armory Inc. Rifles were made in Devine, TX and are highly sought after.
I have a Fulton Armory receivered 18.5" Franken Scout, and a Glen Nelson built rear lugged Supermatch. The Supermatch is extremely accurate when I have my shit together. It will shoot sub moa when I have my fundamentals together.
I pulled that outside shot on the 4th round. Didn't have my shit together on that one.
I don’t know about the OP, I love my double lug M1A. Iron sights at 1000 yards, 18x24 steel plate.
Watch "TLRS 1,000 YDS - Iron Sights - M1A" on YouTube
Watch "TLRS 1,000 YDS - Iron Sights - M1A" on YouTube
When I look at the M-14 I see a lengthy development by the Army Ordnance Dept that resulted in essentially an M-1 with a 20 round magazine. They completely missed the assault rifle concept that the Germans had pioneered as early as 1942. Furthermore the full auto feature was a fiasco which tells me the weapon was approved and put into production without sufficient field testing. I can say from personal experience in Viet Nam that the distances I actually engaged visible Viet Cong ranged from 6' to no longer than 30'. Who shot first won. You don't need a combat rifle with iron sights that can shoot 600 yards .
I have an M-1A for sale. It's in a Troy Battle stock with full length Pic rail on top. Magpul PRS Butt Stock. $2500.00 Also have the wooden stock to go with it.
My Truck gun is a M-1A Socom. easier to get out the window.
I hope this helps the OP in some way.
You will have to take this for what it is. I love the M14 but I am an old Marine. Carried the M14 in 69-70. Cleaning wasn't a problem. And when you ran out of ammo it made a great club. I see they make the M1a in a left hand version now may have to get one. Semper FI.
Last edited:
I was privileged enough to call Pat Rogers a close friend and his story about using an M14 at five yards in Vietnam was always high comedy when told to the M14 clingers
Amen to that, both
While humorous when does becomes dose it can be much more humorous when does not becomes doe snot.
M1A is blah for me (not hated) but would love me some FA M14.
Unlike some of the things I took apart and put back together the M1A/M14 really does need all those parts to function.
Who’dathunkit?
I was privileged enough to call Pat Rogers a close friend and his story about using an M14 at five yards in Vietnam was always high comedy when told to the M14 clingers
Link or retelling of the story please.......
As an aside there has been recent data on the results of an AR round to the arm at 5 yards, as well as chest and head, if anyone is interested.
Not the best picture but I'm just gonna leave this here 'cause I sure as hell love my M14, and mine's a weirdo at that.
Had them on our '09 - '10 as well. 2ID in SE 'Stan.
Sitting on an OP looking it over I questioned whether I was losing it... I had used it and cleaned it so many times and somehow failed to realize where the chassis was made. Just a stones throw from a small town I grew up in.
Our SDM grads carried them. The B4 guys were carrying the new M110... all of those guys were on their first barrel/rifle at that point.
Heh, I had one of the bastardized versions of that stock with a Choate folder on it.
Oh yeah? Bastardized how?
Was M14A2 stock with the wood pistol grip but this folder:
M1A/M14 Side Fold Stock – Choate Machine & Tool – Choate Store Home
www.riflestock.com
Oh dear...
Although, y'know, I did once see a stock for sale that was kinda like that. Experimental paratrooper stock that never got going. Wish I'd bought it, though it was cracked.
No link, it was in person. Just a funny story about him shooting a VC center mass at five yards with an M14 and the VC being unfased.
I think the Italians put one of their Garand based rifles in a folder. You might have seen one of those. The Italians used box mags on their Garand conversions.
Yeah, the BM59 had a folding stock version that I think can be adapted for an M14. Here's one:
But I don't think it was one of those. It might've been one of the Harrington & RIchardson underfolder stocks like this one:
Harrington & Richardson Experimental M14 -
I cam across this interesting M14 made by Harrington & Richardson on gunbroker. It features a folding stock and a lightened receiver. The rifle was made in 1961 for military trials into a folding stock rifle for use by paratroopers, vehicle drivers, and tank crews. The price: $29,995.00 (it is a...
www.thefirearmblog.com It's been a while since I saw the listing and the website doesn't have an archive so I can't go find it again. And out of interest, apparently the Nigerians made some BM59s with a pistol-gripped stock that looks remarkably like my E2 and was intended to address the same shortcomings as the E2:
Last edited:
They must make different height .062" NM front sight blades. I've never had any problems zeroing in my two guns at 100. I have a standard length gun cobbed together out of M14 GI and M1A Springfield Armory parts that, 20-odd years ago, had the right bells and whistles to make it a sub-MOA gun. But, improvements in manufacturing have favored well for new M14 and SA NM rifles. I recently bought a SA NM rifle that, right out of the box, shoots every bit as good as my old gun does. The only thing I changed on it was the NM rear sight. I swapped it out for a standard M14 rear sight and aperture, but I kept the SA NM windage 1/2 MOA adjustment. I don't shoot paper all the time, so I appreciated the extra light gathering capabilities of the standard M14 aperture. Below, I was testing out some IMI M118LR against some Lake City. It seems to group the IMI 2 MOA higher and 1/2 MOA to the left of the Lake City.
M14/M1A guns are what they are. I have two high-end AR10 guns that will shoot tighter than my M1A, but I paid just as much money for each of them as I did the M1A. And, if I put A2 irons on the AR10, I can't shoot it quite as tight as I can the M1A. M14 and M1A guns are fun to shoot, and they take you back to the basics of iron sight shooting. My scope-mounted AR10s are real tack drivers, but I know that no matter how long they sit in the closet getting banged around, those M14/M1A guns are going to shoot where I aim them. And, I can deal with trouble about as far as I can see it with those guns. And, on my place, that's 600 yards and then some.
Attachments
Your rifles have standard length barrels. When you shorten them you need a taller front sight to be able to zero at 100 yards.
I love my M-14/M1A.
I love my M1 Garand
I love my M1917 revolver
Reminder of a more "civilized" time. I love all my classic firearms.
That being said, Much easier to run a bolt for long range and the AR-15 is stupid easy inside 600. Want a bigger bullet? AR-10/308/whatever (now in 6.5!) again, stupid easy to accurize.
That 1917 revolver is awesome. But the sights are junk, it only holds 6 rounds. My CZ holds 20 (9mm), my 2011 holds 18 (40) and my Rock Island 14 (45)
I'm nostalgic, not stupid.
If you give me an(other) M1A, I'll love on it--but if points or reality insists upon itself--I may pick something more modern.
I love my M1 Garand
I love my M1917 revolver
Reminder of a more "civilized" time. I love all my classic firearms.
That being said, Much easier to run a bolt for long range and the AR-15 is stupid easy inside 600. Want a bigger bullet? AR-10/308/whatever (now in 6.5!) again, stupid easy to accurize.
That 1917 revolver is awesome. But the sights are junk, it only holds 6 rounds. My CZ holds 20 (9mm), my 2011 holds 18 (40) and my Rock Island 14 (45)
I'm nostalgic, not stupid.
If you give me an(other) M1A, I'll love on it--but if points or reality insists upon itself--I may pick something more modern.
What stock is that sir?
IIRC, the issue with the sights was known even back then. The Brazilian contract 1937 revolvers from Smith & Wesson were nearly identical to the 1917 but with an altered rear sight (deeper rectangular notch/top strap channel versus the shallower and narrower U or V of the 1917) that presented a better picture.
OK, I gotcha. But, after looking, they do make different height front sight blades. The standard NM GI blade is .567" and they also make one with a base that is 4mm taller.
