[mdt1911]

For some reason, I have a fascination with the M1a rifle, but I've never owned or shot one. Have an AR15, if that matters for this question....

It has obvious historical merit and legacy, and seems to be highly regarded in what I read. But I'm not into guns that aren't practical or otherwise fun and motivating to shoot (and in these times, affordable as well).

I'd love to add one to my collection, but I've bought/built guns before that I ended up not using that much. If it isn't getting used on a regular basis, what is the point?

If I got one, it would be a range toy, and/or home defense gun, but can't see it being a hunting gun.....

I'd love one, but I've never owned or shot one.

Can anyone else relate or give advice??? Good ones aren't cheap.

Thanks!

 

[msgt/ret]

Haven’t had a chance to take it to the range yet but I traded an AR-15 I didn’t care for for an M-1A. To me it is an advancement to the venerable M-1 Garand by the addition of a box magazine to replace the 8 round clip and as a piece of history as a civilian version of the M-14.

 

[10thmtn]

If you are looking for "affordable," then the M1A and its ammo isn't it.

My affordable .30-something rifle buy was a Marlin 336 lever gun. No, it does not have the range of the M1A, but I cannot see past 150 yards (tops) in my area anyway.

 

[G-man*]

I completely went from the AR to the M1A. And you are correct, they are more expensive.

Mine doesn't get shot much. And it won't. It is my go to battle rifle, and doesn't get shot for pleasure.
But for battle they are worth more than a poodle shooter.

 

[BkCo1]

The AR is for light varmint and target shooting. As Glockman say the go to fighting rifle is my M1A. Much more powerful. Don't tell Biden.

 

[johnnydollar]

I completely went from the AR to the M1A. And you are correct, they are more expensive.

Mine doesn't get shot much. And it won't. It is my go to battle rifle, and doesn't get shot for pleasure.
But for battle they are worth more than a poodle shooter.

The AR is for light varmint and target shooting. As Glockman say the go to fighting rifle is my M1A. Much more powerful. Don't tell Biden.

What they said.

 

[darbo]

They are way out of my price range these days but I sure would like to own one.

 

[Snub44]

...in boot camp, I trained with the M14...went to ITR and they gave us M16s...I felt robbed...given a choice, I'd carry the M14 100 miles barefoot before I'd take an M16...it just won me over completely...I've wanted one since...money's the only reason I don't have an M1A...if you feel that way and can buy it ...why not??? enjoy it and post a lotta pictures for us!!!

 

[gasmitty]

My shooting buddy back east has a pair of M1As... his first from Springfield Armory, his next a custom build based on a forged receiver. I've shot the SA, and it's a hoot and a half. That would be on the short list of guns to keep close when the SHTF.

 

[MrBuckwheat]

The AR is inherently more accurate than an M1A. I like the M1 over an AR. But I tend to shoot the ARs more.



Only way to shoot the M1A is iron sites. The ejected brass can catch on the scope mounts. So if you like your scopes stay with the ARs

 

[bmcgilvray]

The M1A is easier to afford to shoot if one handloads. Don't know about the AR 15 being inherently more accurate. At least my AR 15 would have to "bring it's lunch and stay all day" in an effort to beat out my M1A from the bench rest. Due to familiarity with high-power competition, I like iron sights fine.

I actually like the M1 best but realize that it's "out of style" these days.

I love any of the big .30s better than the .223.

 

[cn262]

Below is a link to a thread from last year about my M1A. I've only shot it once since then (barrel break-in and scope sight-in), but it was amazing. I used to shoot High-Power in the mid 1990's and never had a problem with iron sights, but I'm getting older and my eyes suck a bit so I personally need something more. I have an EOTech EXPS-3 on my AR and don't have problems with accuracy at most ranges, but 300 yards is something else (the G33 will take care of that - maybe later this summer). With the scope I didn't have a problem with accuracy at 300 yards, but I have to believe that the .308 would be more accurate at 300 yards and beyond just because of its mass.

I've got an old, original Brookfield Precision scope mount. You don't see those much anymore, but I did notice something similar that might even be a little better. These are expensive, especially once you add really nice rings (~$400 - $500 for just the scope mount and rings), but it is worth it as some of the lesser mounts won't hold-up and maintain a good zero. Improvements to Brookfield Design

BTW, I didn't have any problems at all with brass hitting my scope or mount. The other thing you should look for are good Military Surplus mags. I bought several from the CMP about a decade ago and they are great. I really haven't looked now for anything mil spec, but occasionally see aftermarket mags in the $40 - $60/each range.

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum...sion/151252-my-new-m1a-what-do-you-think.html

Hope this helps with your decision. They are great guns.

 

[BigJon10125]

I will have at least one, and they are worth the weight figuratively and literally. It is a battle tested platform and with the exception of the weight possibly the greatest battle rifle ever IMO. Obviously that is up to ones opinion but unless you are hunting squirrels to eat, it seems to do everything I could think I would need a rifle to do.

 

[ccw9mm]

But I'm not into guns that aren't practical or otherwise fun and motivating to shoot (and in these times, affordable as well).

It's a beautiful rifle, effective caliber, capable at all ranges. Particularly if you're able to participate in rifle competitions nearby that showcase the M1A, I think you will find it to be highly satisfying. A good skill to have, too, capably and effectively shooting the M1A. Not exactly your pappy's .22, that's for sure. Yes, more costly to acquire. Yes, a bit more expensive to run. They're certainly heavier to cart around, as is the ammo. (Though, that's what the family SUV is for.) But, many would say it's unequaled in its class.

Have shot several, but haven't owned one.

 

[Nmuskier]

The AR is inherently more accurate than an M1A.

???
You gotta qualify a statement like that.

OP- What are you talking about, "I can't see it being a hunting gun"? Aren't you looking at a .308 rifle? That round has brought down quite a bit of large game in N. America. Sure, most hunters these days would rather carry a stainless barrel, composite stock Remington than lug that wood stock tank. You're looking at a rifle that can shoot combat accurate groups with iron sights at 800m. That's good enough for hunting.