Springfield M1A

[koiloco]

Hi guys,

thinking about buying a M1A loaded model.

Any personal experience and input would be appreciated.

Of course, recommendation and advise are also welcomed.

One last question, I could get any model right? or just CA ones. My FFL told me something like that but I wasn't too clear on it.

Thanks.

[damon1272]

The Californiastan rifles come with a muzzle brake rather than the normal flash hider. Other than that they are the same as out of state models. They are a blast to shoot and very accurate for what they are.

[69Mach1]

From the SA factory, the CA legal model sports a "muzzle break" instead of the dreaded flash hider. If you buy a regular Loaded M1A from out of state, make sure the seller removes the flash hider and you're good to go. The two stage trigger on my "Loaded" is awesome.

[DrjonesUSA]

Go for it.

Springfield makes a damned great M1A. You'll love your rifle!

Yes, to be legal in CA, your rifle will have to have a muzzle brake, not a flash hider.

The brake has holes in it, the flash hider has long slots.

[Matt C]

Try to get an older model, one made before '92. It will have the GI parts, otherwise you will have to spend hundreds more to get it operating properly.

[WRENCHHEAD]

i don't own a loaded model, i've got a scout thats been a great rifle. you should be happy with your purchase

[colossians323]

Try to get an older model, one made before '92. It will have the GI parts, otherwise you will have to spend hundreds more to get it operating properly.

Either your spouting BS based on a lack of experience, or you have some sort of bias.
I have several made before 92, and several made after 92.

Its not that you have to spend hundreds to get them running right, it seems that the only problem that has any kind of prevailance, is that the extractors fail.
None of mine have had this problem, and I shoot them all the time.
If the extractor does fail, this is typically about a 25 to 50 dollar repair, that one can do for themselves.
Please elaborate, on what you are going to have to spend hundreds on to get one running right that has been manufactured after 92.
It could just be that I am ignorant, and just got lucky with the rifles I have purchased.

[chickenfried]

I don't think this statement is very accurate. While they're nice to have, GI parts aren't an absolute necessity for a properly operating m1a.

It will have the GI parts, otherwise you will have to spend hundreds more to get it operating properly.

[Matt C]

Either your spouting BS based on a lack of experience, or you have some sort of bias.

Well, I'm not spouting BS, and I can't think of any season a would have a bias towards old SAI rifles. I am in fact speaking from experience. The non-GI parts on current/late production SAI rifles are out of spec and fail, QC at SAI is now almost non-existant. I have had extractor problems yes, as well as other problems including but not limited to the bolt becoming disasembled while firing and sending parts of the gun several feet away. ALL problems were solved by replacing SAI parts with GI parts. I would NOT trust a current production SAI with my life, as always though YMMV.

Also, a bit of civility would be nice, no need to accuse people of "sporting BS" on this forum.

[chickenfried]

If it smells like a duck and walks like a duck. Please post your pre-92 theory on www.m14forums.com.

Also, a bit of civility would be nice, no need to accuse people of "sporting BS" on this forum.

[colossians323]

Well, I'm not spouting BS, and I can't think of any season a would have a bias towards old SAI rifles. I am in fact speaking from experience. The non-GI parts on current/late production SAI rifles are out of spec and fail, QC at SAI is now almost non-existant. I have had extractor problems yes, as well as other problems including but not limited to the bolt becoming disasembled while firing and sending parts of the gun several feet away. ALL problems were solved by replacing SAI parts with GI parts. I would NOT trust a current production SAI with my life, as always though YMMV.

Also, a bit of civility would be nice, no need to accuse people of "sporting BS" on this forum.

Pardon me if I was not coming across as civil, I just get tired of hearing the whole BS about the QC problems, guns built after the ninety's, mostly by people who don't even own one.
It sounds like you got a lemon, and should have used Springfields awesome warranty, and they typically make it right.
As stated before, I own several from both eras, and have problems with neither, and never had to make use of Springfields warranty.
My two socoms came loaded with USGI parts, so I don't know where this USGI myth thing comes into play either. The Triggers, oprods, are all USGI on my socoms, and the funny thing is they are split between the coveted TRW parts, and winchester parts.
GOOD luck with your rifle.

You never did reply what you spent hundreds on to make yours run right, and how many hundreds did you have to spend to make it run right?

[koiloco]

So guys,

what kind of accuracy should I expect from handload ammo?

am I expecting too much when hoping for MOA at 100 yard?

Also, is the super match worth the extra $$$?

[koiloco]

Will this stock work? It says for M14???

http://www.jallenenterprises.com/html/jae_home.html

[colossians323]

So guys,

what kind of accuracy should I expect from handload ammo?

am I expecting too much when hoping for MOA at 100 yard?

Also, is the super match worth the extra $$$?

I would stick with just a standard, and you can get that kind of MOA accuracy easily at 100 yards, you should shoot further, and use match, or hand loads.
You can accurize a standard for cheaper then you can get the loaded for.
The super match, in my opinon, is a waste of money, unless you are doing nothing but shooting cometition.
But thats just my opinion, plus, I'm cheap.

[colossians323]

Go Here and all your questions will be answered.
Abot the stock, I love the look, and hear good things about it, but I'm to cheap to buy it.