Best Price on M1A?

[TonyNorCal]

I don't disagree with anything in your post and I don't wish to represent myself as an M-14 expert. I too have seen the above info regarding Springfield's tests. However, I think it is important to consider that Springfield was in direct competition with Norinco/Polytech, potential sales were on the line, and I am not confident that such a situation leads to scientific objectivity.

Furthermore, Springfield doesn't have such a splendid reputation in the quality control arena in recent years. I've read of receivers having scope mounting grooves out of spec and also of a second receiver issue which escapes me at the moment. Additionally, some of Springfield's cast parts seem to be junk...breaking rather frequently and requiring the owner to make multiple use of their (albeit excellent) warranty.

Both Fulton Armory and Ron Smith (Smith Enterprises) think highly of the Chinese receivers. Opinions such as those are good enough for me.

By the way...if you decide not to purchase a $500 Chinese M14 with a USGI bolt kindly send me a PM and I will.

[HEUER]

Tony, you sound like a reasonable guy. In the same book let's here what Ron Smith of Smith Enterprises has to say on the subject, I mean you do value his opinion:

Recently, several custom services have offered heat treating and rehardening services for Polly Tech receivers. One such company is Smith Enterprises of Tempe, Arizona. The owner, Ron Smith, is a fourth-generation armor and was trained in ordinance manufacturing and metallurgy. He has studied the metalurgic properties of the Chinese receivers and bolts and found them to be made of ordanance grade steel, if somewhat softer than American-made bolts and receivers. Accordingly, he has developed a double heat treating method to harden receivers and bolts and as this was written, has performed over 2000 such heat treat operations.

Mr. Smith has found that the Chinese bolt, as received, measure about 40 on the rockwell C scale while the receivers measure between 45 and 50. After the reheat treatment, bolts and receivers approach to harden his figures of American-made bolts and receivers. In addition to heat treating, Smith Enterprises can remachine the Chinese receivers to except American-made bolts.

- Joe Poyer "The M14 Type Rifle" North Cape Pub INC 2000

BTW I have never had any failure with my SA in five years.

[TonyNorCal]

Ah, ok.

Well, I will take Ron Smith's word over Springfield's.

From Ron Smith's website...notice he also mentions some Springfield receivers can be soft and in need of heat treatment. And the Chinese receivers vary.
----------
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY A good cast receiver, we don't have to do much reworking to ensure proper operation and unless requested, we do not rework the receiver to our standard. We have come across some receivers that were a little soft. Our heat treatment is very beneficial.


CHINESE Good Billet receivers (there is no real difference between Poly Technologies and Norinco). The receivers do vary in hardness, in 1999, we experienced receivers ranging from 41Rc to 60Rc, Mil. Spec. is 49Rc to 56Rc. After we rework the receiver to accept USGI bolts, we generally have very little work to obtain good lug contact. We do perform our special modifications and recommend heat treatment when necessary.
-----------------------------------

And below is a barrel comparison...evidently the Chinese barrel aren't so bad (as per Ron)

-----------------------------------
USGI or U.S. Several USGI and commercial makers are available. USGI barrels have Chrome lined barrels and can provide very good accuracy. Most commercial barrels are not chrome lined and are going to be of match grade. Barrel accuracy can vary and it does not matter who the maker is. If the barrel is bad it is just bad.

CHINESE Equivalent to USGI barrels. There are two metric threads on the barrel, one for the "Gas Cylinder Lock" and one for the "Castle Nut". The Castle Nut threads are very close to U.S. threads and can be converted, but the Gas Cylinder Lock threads are too fine. We have Clients getting 1" groups with these barrels. They are generally very good barrels, but like U.S. barrels, you can get a lemon.

[TonyNorCal]

From a review posted on Fulton Armory's website, re: Chinese Receivers

B. Metallurgy. I have never heard of a first hand or published report of a receiver failing metallurgically after an upgrade has been performed and non-defective factory ammunition was used. Chinese receivers surprisingly enough, are forged, not casted. This is a more expensive and labour consuming technique. I find this to be a plus, seeing the fact that the original M14 receivers were forged also. The Springfield and Armscorp receivers are milled from castings.

In regards to the usage of non-factory ammunition, it has been made known to me by Gary Jeter of the VA State Rifle team that,

"We recently cracked several Springfield M14 receivers. Heavy loads with 190 grain bullets were suspect, as the receiver cracked where the bolt strikes the receiver at its most rearward movement."

So, if you decide to use hand-loads there is a possibility of a metallurgic failure with the Polytech/Norinco receiver. But then again, anything is possible. It's just that using factory ammunition allows for liability (can we say "LAWYERS," kids?).

Another side note here: Quoting from another Rec.gunner, John Kepler:

"I have a highly unofficial assay of the metal in a Norinco, done by the DCM. The metal is a 5100 series chromium steel. This is an EXCELLENT receiver metal, though traditionally, not used that much in the US due to it's harder machineability."

[HEUER]

Tony, please note that in the article Fulton clearly states that they are not aware of any failures AFTER their heat treatment.

Please also note that there have been several generations and companies that produced the M1A. The first M1A was produced by Elmer Ballance of the L.H. Gun Company in Devine, Texas in Septemeber 1971. In 1968 Mr. Balance acquired the name the "Springfield Armory". In 1974 the company was sold and moved to Geneseo Illinois. In 1994 Springfield Armory Inc was forced to declare bankruptcy. The company that we know today as Springfield Armory is really Springfield Inc. The recievers produced from 1994 are considered to be a solid product. the standard models produced from 96 to 2001 with GI chrome barrels are known to provide excellent service.

When a company says a "Spring Field Armory" reciever has failed, I sometimes suspect that it is a rifle produced in the early 80's as the quality of these rifles is reported to be not as good as what is being produced now.

I have seen all the above cut and paste information previously, and most of it can be found on Different's M1A/M14 site.

As far as the "Springfield M14" is concerned I suspect that was just a poor re-weld job of the real deal, even though the crack appeared in the rear and not on the mid section of the reciever.

[Blue]

http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&f=93&t=283350

[TonyM]

Originally posted by Tony:

As mentioned above, current issue Springfield M1As do not have USGI parts (although I recently heard of a new one that did...but I think it's rare now).

Actually, my M1A Socom produced in January 2005 has USGI parts on it. I got a USGI Bolt and Trigger group. Another friend got the same setup.

I know that they are out of Chrome barrels, but honestly, I think they are "running low" on other parts, however, many of the rifles being built today are with USGI parts. I had received a response from Different on another board where he concluded that the whole "They are out of parts" seems to be fodder to raise the prices of USGI parts on the market even higher.

[esskay]

Originally posted by TonyM:
Actually, my M1A Socom produced in January 2005 has USGI parts on it. I got a USGI Bolt and Trigger group. Another friend got the same setup.

Yeah, my SOCOM has USGI trigger group and op rod. This was actually one reason I intentionally bought mine used--so that I could confirm which types of parts it had (not to mention it was cheaper too!).

[HEUER]

Esskay TontM /what manufacture made your bolt?

[TonyNorCal]

I also posted this below in the for sale section...if you're looking for a new Springfield this seems like a good deal...$1145, new in box, 2 10 rounds mags, and all ready for Kali.

http://www.sturmgewehr.com/webBBS/semi4sale.cgi?read=115014

[esskay]

Originally posted by heuer:
Esskay TontM /what manufacture made your bolt?

The bolt in my SOCOM is commercial SA, but the extractor was replaced with a USGI part.

I bought a TRW bolt to go with the other TRW parts on the rifle, but I don't have headspacing gauges to check the installation...

[TonyNorCal]

Originally posted by heuer:
Tony, please note that in the article Fulton clearly states that they are not aware of any failures AFTER their heat treatment.

Please also note that there have been several generations and companies that produced the M1A. The first M1A was produced by Elmer Ballance of the L.H. Gun Company in Devine, Texas in Septemeber 1971. In 1968 Mr. Balance acquired the name the "Springfield Armory". In 1974 the company was sold and moved to Geneseo Illinois. In 1994 Springfield Armory Inc was forced to declare bankruptcy. The company that we know today as Springfield Armory is really Springfield Inc. The recievers produced from 1994 are considered to be a solid product. the standard models produced from 96 to 2001 with GI chrome barrels are known to provide excellent service.

When a company says a "Spring Field Armory" reciever has failed, I sometimes suspect that it is a rifle produced in the early 80's as the quality of these rifles is reported to be not as good as what is being produced now.

I have seen all the above cut and paste information previously, and most of it can be found on Different's M1A/M14 site.

As far as the "Springfield M14" is concerned I suspect that was just a poor re-weld job of the real deal, even though the crack appeared in the rear and not on the mid section of the reciever.

Point taken. Seems the consensus is that the Chinese receivers are fine receivers, BUT, that as issues their hardness may vary. I am going to post on the M-14 forum to ask more about this. However, yes, both Smith Enterprises and Fulton make reference to heat treating Chinese receivers. I am not an M-14 expert...but my personal opinion is that I would rather have a forged (provided it is in fact solid and strong) receiver over a cast. My Chinese M14, which I recently took possesion of (yay! ) cost me $650. Even with heat treatment and a USGI bolt added it will clock in at lower than most any used Springfield...never mind a new one! I think paying the $1400 or so that new Springfields seem to cost is nuts. Even if you don't want a Chinese rifle you can easily get a lightly used Sprinfield with USGI parts for less. I would take a Chinese with a heat-treated, forged receiver, USGI bolt, and a chrome lined barrel over a new Springfield with SA Inc parts and a non-chrome lining.

I wasn't aware some new Springfields are again coming with USGI parts. I called them a few months back and was told the they ran out the USGI barrels a few years ago lol. Perhaps they found a few under all the broken cast parts they replace with their excellent lifetime warranty .

I am curious about the strength of Chinese forging and I'm going to ask over at the M-14 forum and see what they say.

[HEUER]

I am still waiting for my buddy to set up a time when I can inspect the Poly. I understand that the faux supressor on some Poly's are welded in place . As far as what they say on the m-14 forum it is a mixed bag. Some say good, some say bad. Heat treatment is good for Poly's, but by the time you swap the GI bolt, have a gunsmith check headspacing, heat treat the reciever, and possibly replace the op rod your in the same boat. I have a standard with a chrome lined barrel and I wish they had not stopped. Poly geometry is suppossed to be very good, but if something happens, mainland China will not repair it for you.

[esskay]

Originally posted by Tony:
I wasn't aware some new Springfields are again coming with USGI parts. I called them a few months back and was told the they ran out the USGI barrels a few years ago lol. Perhaps they found a few under all the broken cast parts they replace with their excellent lifetime warranty .

To be clear, I haven't heard many (if any!) reports of USGI barrels coming in new SA rifles... just some USGI parts (e.g. bolts, trigger groups, op rods).

[TonyM]

Originally posted by esskay:
To be clear, I haven't heard many (if any!) reports of USGI barrels coming in new SA rifles... just some USGI parts (e.g. bolts, trigger groups, op rods).

Same here.