M1A or AR10 - 308 variant

[therealnickb]

Originally Posted by theLBC

that would be my choice too, if i didn't get the scar.
interchangeable barrels (like the scar) and military tough.

i wouldn't get a conventional rifle while it is still legal to get something like the lmt or 20s. they might be able to make them hard or impossible to buy, but i doubt they will be able to take them away.

Well, I was just talking about what I have available.

It’s pretty difficult to image what may be available for purchase in the future. IMO.

[Don the savage]

I have a rem 25 which has been a great rifle and is very accurate.
I want a m1a but i am holding out for a 5 digit version made with a gi part kit, preferably with a trw bolt. ( i know oddly specific)

[-aK-]

What do you want to use it for?

and why remove the legality question? is this for outside CA?

[vinconco]

I've had them both and prefer the AR style. I couldn't hunt with the M1A, too big, heavy and noisy.

Scope mounting was a giant PIA with the M1A. The B Square mount wasn't solid enough.

To accurize a M1A required a bedding job that, for all intents and purposes, locked the barreled action into the stock and was almost impossible for a hobbyist to do correctly.

The AR style just required a FF handguard and a good barrel to be as accurate as the best M1A's

I sold my early Springfield Armory M1A (made from original SA mil spec parts w/ NM bbl) for enough to buy a DPMS G2 Hunter 20" bbl that weighed in @ 7 lbs. AND a good scope/mount. It shoots better than the M1A ever did.

[ScottsBad]

Originally Posted by theLBC

good arguments for you and everyone has different needs vs wants.

i was thinking more in line with 800-1000 as a challenge.

ar-15s should be good enough for 95% of the situations for home defense, and if not, you're probably in trouble anyway.

oth, for shooting long range, or even medium range, there is almost nothing for a civilian that is as easy for putting 10 rounds on target very quickly. this rifle is perfect for the jp challenge (putting 3 rounds into a target before you hear the sound of the first hit).

the 17s can hit out to 800 so i am not taking anything away from it as an all around rifle, but being much lighter it isn't as easy to keep on target as the 15lb+ 20s (with scope and bipod).

Funny, but your scenarios are completely meaningless to me. I would NEVER need to take a shot in anger at those distances. Its pointless to take shots at that distance unless you are in a team and you are sure you can identify the targets.

Plus, there is no scenario where I would set up a snipers nest with a spotter. That's military, LE fantasy.

If you are just talking about shooting steel or paper then OK, but for defending wooded property no chance.

So do you even own a SCAR? Do you know what you are talking about? I detect the smell of BS or immaturity. Please, change my mind.

[theLBC]

Originally Posted by ScottsBad

Funny, but your scenarios are completely meaningless to me. I would NEVER need to take a shot in anger at those distances. Its pointless to take shots at that distance unless you are in a team and you are sure you can identify the targets.

Plus, there is no scenario where I would set up a snipers nest with a spotter. That's military, LE fantasy.

If you are just talking about shooting steel or paper then OK, but for defending wooded property no chance.

So do you even own a SCAR? Do you know what you are talking about? I detect the smell of BS or immaturity. Please, change my mind.

lol, who is talking about anger?
i shoot for fun, and 100 yards isn't that fun when it is so easy.

handguns at 25 yards is more challenging than it was was when i was younger, but i still shoot at that distance even though the odds of me having to shoot that far in self defense is pretty low when i live and work in a place that there is no line of sight farther than 50 ft.

oh, and i have one of the first 200 Scar 20S sold.

this is at angeles shooting ranges with cheap m80 ball ammo.
they don't allow double taps or rapid fire shooting. i took one shot high so i could see the hit better and pulled one low right.
did not hold for wind or try to shoot a "good group" but was just trying to get better at seeing hits.



i did miss one of 5 here, because i didn't know i was hitting right edge, and didn't wait for it to stop swinging.
this is one of my first times shooting the scar and obviously the first time i tried to take video.



i dunno about anyone else, i think it is fun to shoot something you can't even see without help.

[Zoidberg]

The AR10 is easier to shoot, easier to disassemble and clean, easier to put optics on, and suffers from less point of aim shift as the barrel heats up. Not to mention many of the parts including magazines are cheaper, more plentiful, and easier to install.

On the other hand, the M1A is freaking awesome, looks iconic, and is so fun to shoot. That’s what it comes down to. Do you want something that is so practical to the extent that it becomes almost boring, or do you want to look and feel cool but pay extra and do extra work to accessorize it?

[Ceemack]

This would be an interesting question in America.

In California, it’s not a question at all: the M1A, simply because the California-legal versions from Springfield and other makers are featureless AS DESIGNED. Aside from the muzzle brake, the stock, trigger, and mag release are all in their original, proven form. I may only be able to buy 10-round mags, but I don’t have to use a bullet button or any other trickery to slide the thing under the law.

Without California’s absurd laws, the “AR-10” (today’s models are really scaled-up AR-15s) would have some advantages...slightly better accuracy, better controls, easier optics mounting, easier mag changes.

But for me, the “featureless” aspect trumps all of that...which is why I added a Springer M1A and a hand-built M14 to supersede my neutered ARs.

They’re a bit of an adjustment, but very cool rifles in their own right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk