Tweet
Hello all,
I've read a few threads on this forum about the virtues and vices of the Archangel M1a Target stock, i.e., it's a JAE-100 ripoff, it's quality, utility, etc. I've owned a Springfield M1A Scout for many years now, and for a long time it was my only serious rifle. I've tried many things to get the most out of it, with varying degrees of success, but i'm always on the lookout for a good improvement to it.
Before I continue, I must point out that I'm not a serious precision shooter. I used to be pretty serious about precision back in high school, but these days, I mainly go to the range for fun. I don't handload (yet), I don't fire from a super stable rest, etc. I do appreciate a good accurate rifle, though.
Rifle 1
This is the M1A Scout I purchased circa 1998, brand new,with the standard black painted fiberglass stock. It probably has less than two thousand rounds through it, I haven't kept track. Never had any issues with the rifle that I wasn't the cause of. With irons, it would usually give me 2-3 inch groups at 100 yards.
Over the years, I added a Burris 2.75x Scout Scope, and then a JAE-100 G2 stock. With this setup, I was averaging about 1.5 groups with surplus ammo, and was very happy with the improvement. I'm sure it could do better with match ammo and work with the barrel tensioner, but I haven't had the time until recently.
Crappy photo of this setup:
I was quite happy with the rifle at this point, but the increase in weight was significant. It was a great shooter, but I missed the relatively light, handy weapon it once was. When I saw the hubbub about the Archangel stock, it got me thinking again.
After much musing and hand-wringing, I decided to purchase a second M1A rifle, and set one up for target shooting, and another as a lightweight carbine. I found another M1A Scout for sale by a Calgunner, and purchased it.
Rifle 2
Except for the modified KAC rail, this Scout was pretty much bone-stock to my eyes. The rifle had an unknown number of rounds through it, and the seller was not the original owner. Like my previous Scout, it would do about three inch groups at 100 yards with irons.
With the two rifle in hand, I purchased an Archangel M1A Target stock and proceeded to modify it to fit Rifle 1.
Archangel M1A Target Stock
After receiving the Archangel stock, I was actually quite happy with the quality of manufacture. The molding is clean, very few mold lines, and the finish is quite nice. Actually, it makes the standard Springfield fiberglass stock look like the proverbial sow's ear.
Out of the box, the Archangel is not CA compliant, from what I can tell. I used plastic model sprue and Plati-Dip to fill in the saddle area of the grip to make it no longer a pistol grip. If I had to do it again, I'd use sculpting epoxy putty (What miniature hobbyists call 'grey stuff'). Since the length of pull is a bit long for my arms, I removed the adjustable butt plate, easily done with a torx wrench, pin punch, and hammer. I then cut off part of the recoil pad and glued it to the back of the stock, reducing the length of pull by about 3/4 inch.
The instructions with the Archangel stock tell you that a slight bit of sanding/filing might be necessary to make the stock fit most M14 rifles. This is a gross understatement. In addition to filing down the area where the trigger group contacts the stock, I also had to do significant filing where the stock meets the forward barrel band, the front part of the reciever, and the pocket for the receiver lugs. This isn't difficult, as the plastic is easy to work with, but this isn't a quick process. After filing, I was able to get the stock to seat, though the fit is still quite tight.
The Archangel claims some accuracy increase over a standard stock, and I found this to be true. With surplus ammo, I was averaging under two inches, and with Hornady 168 grain TAP FPD, my best group was 1.25" at 100 yards. With a Leupold Variable Scout scope, the rifle came in at 9 lbs. even on my crappy luggage scale, and is appreciably handier than with the JAE-100. Recoil is definitely more noticeable that with the JAE, but is not unpleasant.
I assembled rifle 2 with the JAE-100, a Springfield Cluster Rail, and a Trijicon Accupoint 3-9x in a Larue cantilever mount. I haven't had time to do a serious accuracy test yet, but the few rounds I have through the setup have given me about 1.5 inch groups with surplus ammo.
Thus, my current assessment of the Archangel M1A Target Stock
Pros:
-Lightweight
-Comfortable
-Inexpensive
-Adjustable for scopes, length of pull (for average shooters)
-Easily modified by your average shooter
-Tight fit, which may provide an accuracy increase over a basic stock
Cons:
-Not CA compliant in base form, but easily modified.
-Requires some effort to fit to your average rifle
-Not compatible with KAC rail or Springfield Cluster Rail w/o modification.
Vs. the JAE-100 G2
-Despite what some have said, in my opinion, the Archangel is a ripoff of the JAE-100, at least from an aesthetics standpoint (See comparison photos). That said, it is a quality product, and serves a very different need than the JAE. Whether that matters or not is up to the individual.
-I put around 12 hours of work to get this rifle to fit right and be compliant, while the JAE-100 G2 installs in minutes. Whether the time expenditure is worth it is also up to the individual. On the other hand, I feel comfortable taking a file to the Archangel, which I would not do to the JAE-100, due to it's price and quality.
-The Archangel stock has mounts for QD and push-button sling swivels, and a small section of (plastic) rail under the fore end, and that's it. The JAE-100 stock has an ever-growing plethora of options available, so you can set your rifle up however you want.
-The Archangel has good quality and finish, but nowhere near the level of the JAE-100. You get what you pay for. That said, I still think it's a good product, and a good buy.
-The Archangel gave me an accuracy boost from the basic stock, but the final accuracy potential of the JAE-100 is much higher, due to the rock solid lockup of the bedding system, and the barrel tensioner.
More photos can be found here:
I've read a few threads on this forum about the virtues and vices of the Archangel M1a Target stock, i.e., it's a JAE-100 ripoff, it's quality, utility, etc. I've owned a Springfield M1A Scout for many years now, and for a long time it was my only serious rifle. I've tried many things to get the most out of it, with varying degrees of success, but i'm always on the lookout for a good improvement to it.
Before I continue, I must point out that I'm not a serious precision shooter. I used to be pretty serious about precision back in high school, but these days, I mainly go to the range for fun. I don't handload (yet), I don't fire from a super stable rest, etc. I do appreciate a good accurate rifle, though.
Rifle 1
This is the M1A Scout I purchased circa 1998, brand new,with the standard black painted fiberglass stock. It probably has less than two thousand rounds through it, I haven't kept track. Never had any issues with the rifle that I wasn't the cause of. With irons, it would usually give me 2-3 inch groups at 100 yards.
Over the years, I added a Burris 2.75x Scout Scope, and then a JAE-100 G2 stock. With this setup, I was averaging about 1.5 groups with surplus ammo, and was very happy with the improvement. I'm sure it could do better with match ammo and work with the barrel tensioner, but I haven't had the time until recently.
Crappy photo of this setup:
I was quite happy with the rifle at this point, but the increase in weight was significant. It was a great shooter, but I missed the relatively light, handy weapon it once was. When I saw the hubbub about the Archangel stock, it got me thinking again.
After much musing and hand-wringing, I decided to purchase a second M1A rifle, and set one up for target shooting, and another as a lightweight carbine. I found another M1A Scout for sale by a Calgunner, and purchased it.
Rifle 2
Except for the modified KAC rail, this Scout was pretty much bone-stock to my eyes. The rifle had an unknown number of rounds through it, and the seller was not the original owner. Like my previous Scout, it would do about three inch groups at 100 yards with irons.
With the two rifle in hand, I purchased an Archangel M1A Target stock and proceeded to modify it to fit Rifle 1.
Archangel M1A Target Stock
After receiving the Archangel stock, I was actually quite happy with the quality of manufacture. The molding is clean, very few mold lines, and the finish is quite nice. Actually, it makes the standard Springfield fiberglass stock look like the proverbial sow's ear.
Out of the box, the Archangel is not CA compliant, from what I can tell. I used plastic model sprue and Plati-Dip to fill in the saddle area of the grip to make it no longer a pistol grip. If I had to do it again, I'd use sculpting epoxy putty (What miniature hobbyists call 'grey stuff'). Since the length of pull is a bit long for my arms, I removed the adjustable butt plate, easily done with a torx wrench, pin punch, and hammer. I then cut off part of the recoil pad and glued it to the back of the stock, reducing the length of pull by about 3/4 inch.
The instructions with the Archangel stock tell you that a slight bit of sanding/filing might be necessary to make the stock fit most M14 rifles. This is a gross understatement. In addition to filing down the area where the trigger group contacts the stock, I also had to do significant filing where the stock meets the forward barrel band, the front part of the reciever, and the pocket for the receiver lugs. This isn't difficult, as the plastic is easy to work with, but this isn't a quick process. After filing, I was able to get the stock to seat, though the fit is still quite tight.
The Archangel claims some accuracy increase over a standard stock, and I found this to be true. With surplus ammo, I was averaging under two inches, and with Hornady 168 grain TAP FPD, my best group was 1.25" at 100 yards. With a Leupold Variable Scout scope, the rifle came in at 9 lbs. even on my crappy luggage scale, and is appreciably handier than with the JAE-100. Recoil is definitely more noticeable that with the JAE, but is not unpleasant.
I assembled rifle 2 with the JAE-100, a Springfield Cluster Rail, and a Trijicon Accupoint 3-9x in a Larue cantilever mount. I haven't had time to do a serious accuracy test yet, but the few rounds I have through the setup have given me about 1.5 inch groups with surplus ammo.
Thus, my current assessment of the Archangel M1A Target Stock
Pros:
-Lightweight
-Comfortable
-Inexpensive
-Adjustable for scopes, length of pull (for average shooters)
-Easily modified by your average shooter
-Tight fit, which may provide an accuracy increase over a basic stock
Cons:
-Not CA compliant in base form, but easily modified.
-Requires some effort to fit to your average rifle
-Not compatible with KAC rail or Springfield Cluster Rail w/o modification.
Vs. the JAE-100 G2
-Despite what some have said, in my opinion, the Archangel is a ripoff of the JAE-100, at least from an aesthetics standpoint (See comparison photos). That said, it is a quality product, and serves a very different need than the JAE. Whether that matters or not is up to the individual.
-I put around 12 hours of work to get this rifle to fit right and be compliant, while the JAE-100 G2 installs in minutes. Whether the time expenditure is worth it is also up to the individual. On the other hand, I feel comfortable taking a file to the Archangel, which I would not do to the JAE-100, due to it's price and quality.
-The Archangel stock has mounts for QD and push-button sling swivels, and a small section of (plastic) rail under the fore end, and that's it. The JAE-100 stock has an ever-growing plethora of options available, so you can set your rifle up however you want.
-The Archangel has good quality and finish, but nowhere near the level of the JAE-100. You get what you pay for. That said, I still think it's a good product, and a good buy.
-The Archangel gave me an accuracy boost from the basic stock, but the final accuracy potential of the JAE-100 is much higher, due to the rock solid lockup of the bedding system, and the barrel tensioner.
More photos can be found here:
Comment